[rdfweb-dev] Time's running out?
jim at jibbering.com
Fri Aug 8 18:14:04 UTC 2003
"Julian Bond" <julian_bond at voidstar.com>
> The stats show a large number of infrequently used tags, many of which
> are not in the spec.
Things which aren't in the spec can be ignored they do not harm using the
data in any way, extra triples will always simply not show up in queries,
but they can be made available to the user. Or tools can be taught to
understand them if they have meaning, nothing is lost by having the, other
than it seems some PR.
> So Libby's (sorry to take
> this as an example, Libby) FOAF file is just as valid as mine despite
> the fact that Libby's is so far from what I can code to expect that it's
> essentially unusable to me.
Could you please explain how it's unusable to you, it's fine with all my
tools, it's all nicely understandable, You can claim all you want that it's
not a lack of understanding on your part, but it's either that, or a problem
with poor quality tools. It's valid RDF and contains lots of triples that
we can easily attach to Libby.
> Indeed. I don't want to experiment with RDF tools chewing on data.
Then exactly why are you interested in FOAF, you need to have an RDF tool to
chew on it, it's useless without one.
> I want to write apps.
To do what? Many of us have no problem producing Apps with foaf data, that
aggregrate it in large ways and do all sorts of interesting things, you seem
to blaming the spec for your own failure to produce apps, when other people
have no problem, I'm confident that the reason for this is you're not using
RDF tools, and that simply won't work, no extensible system will work in a
pure XML format.
More information about the foaf-dev