[foaf-protocols] First WebID Teleconference minutes (July 27th 2010)
kidehen at openlinksw.com
Mon Aug 2 19:28:46 CEST 2010
Henry Story wrote:
> On 2 Aug 2010, at 18:45, Nathan wrote:
>> I really like that sentence - perfect even imho.
>> 'MUST have a Machine and Human readable representation of a structured
>> profile document'
> "MUST have a representation of an RDF graph in a machine readable representation. See the section on representations for more about this."
RDF Graph Doesn't cut it.
You are fixating a little on RDF.
If you are going to fixate on RDF then we aren't in agreement.
"RDF" is as confusing and problematic as you perceive the sentence: ...
structured representation of a profile document.
We can't fix RDF incomprehension issues via WebID spec. Please don't go
down this path.
Let people come to understand what Structured Data is about. How you
make a Structured Profile Document that's palabtable to machines and humans.
"RDF" is very problematic cos most assume its RDF/XML, and I've long
given up trying to fix that misconception.
> You cannot force a Human readable representation in the spec. That is again a pragmatic issue. If you don't have one, then in many use cases it will be difficult for people to understand what is going on, so takeup will be slow.
> This will become obvious when we have more good demos.
We don't force anything into the spec. We just protect the spec by using
I want WebID protected from FUD. But of course, I will only raise this
matter so many more times before I go completely silent about this
President & CEO
More information about the foaf-protocols