Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 13:29, Rick Jelliffe <rjelliffe@a...> wrote: > So perhaps we can amend my comment to: I have a perception of people > adopting RDF (in XML) then figuring out they didn't get any extra benefit > over using plain old XML or an optimized RDF notation. What, so you only want examples where people use XML in boring and obvious ways? :) You *can* do RDF in XML where the ontologies are clever and the notation of getting from model to implementation is low, i.e. well designed and thought-out systems, but they are indeed far and wide apart. Because semantic data modeling is a reasonably new thing (although in Internet years it's really dog years by now) people tend to do large and fluffy ontology work (not to mention that I think the RDF people did a large and fluffy meta model when they designed RDF itself). The last few years have seen some pretty good improvements, with more concise and practical RDF ontologies, so I think we're seeing acceleration of use that will have an important impact on the future of computing, for sure. Alex -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Project Wrangler, SOA, Information Alchemist, UX, RESTafarian, Topic Maps ------------------------------------------ http://shelter.nu/blog/ --------
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
