[foaf-protocols] Using @rel to broaden scope of what we currently call FOAF+SSL

Jiří Procházka ojirio at gmail.com
Thu May 13 21:01:02 CEST 2010


On 05/13/2010 08:38 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
> Story Henry wrote:
>> On 13 May 2010, at 18:57, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>>
>>   
>>>> We can give them a standard template to add to their HTML. 
>>>>       
>>> Don't dispute that, this was one of the bootstrap patterns I worked on with Martin Hepp re. GoodRelations, and recently we felt even that wasn't low enough re. activation threshold.  I am sure you've seen how many HTML+RDFa cookbooks associated with GoodRelations.
>>>
>>> Even worse, the opengraph folks receive a chunk of RDFa that only required pasting into a <div/> within <body/> and as of this time, their HTML page hasn't been updated etc..
>>>
>>> But most important of all, I offered a suggestion. Validity or invalidity of its merits is something that plays out over time etc..
>>>
>>>     
>>>> That would work just as well. And it would not take long to develop.
>>>>  
>>>>       
>>> I don't know what you feel needs to be developed here?
>>>     
>>
>> Well it's one more thing we would all have to implement to get it to work. So thereby making things more complicated... I also gave some reasons as to why you are not going to make things any easier, and also reduce functionality in a significant way.
>>
>> Essentially you are trying to develop another rdf syntax.
> 
> I am not creating a new RDF syntax.
> 
> I am working with an Entity-Attribute-Graph model. What RDF refers to as 
> it Graph Model (which basically adds URIs to the mix re. Names in the 
> EAV 3-tuple slots).
> 
>>  I don't think adding more such syntaxes is going to help. 
> It isn't really a syntax issue.
> 
> Its about locating data in a structured based on a common model i.e., EAV.

Hi, I understand what you mean Kingsley, but Henry is right - this is a
syntax issue.
Sooner or later people grow tired of implementing parsers and
serializers all those various formats, so for that we have RDF where you
can just use a general RDF toolkit in the language you use and you use
the data.

Best,
Jiri

>> As Facebook now is adopting RDFa, by the time you have finished your spec, there may be more people understanding and parsing rdfa than people willing to learn yet another rdf format.
>>   
> 
> EAV is already used all over the place. Sadly conflating data 
> representation oriented markup and actual data models has lead to mass 
> confusion (including this conversation).
> 
>> So that's just my opinion, of course, and you may be onto something. But as you saw, I think there are a lot more things we can do to get this going. And a good end user experience is the most important. The developers will have no trouble getting into rdfa I think, especially if we can make knowing it cool - getting you to parties, new jobs, etc...
>>   
> 
> End justifies the means.
> 
> I should have implemented and then talked (my normal mode).
> Let's not burn anymore time, in due course there will be better context 
> for what I have in mind etc..
> 
> 
>>   
>>> That said, it doesn't matter right now. There's an option out there that nobody needs to implement or use :-)
>>>     
>>
>> yes, thanks for putting that option forward. I'll keep it in the back of my mind, and see if this does help solve a big problem. I have changed my mind before :-)
>>
>>   
> 
> We all change our minds, part of being human :-)
> 
>> One thing that would certainly help us already is to move to support the rdfa with literals. As it simplifies the rdfa a lot.
>>   
> 
> Done.
> 
> And testing that and the fix for RDFa based profile pages.
> 
> 
> Kingsley
>>
>> Henry
>>   
> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://lists.foaf-project.org/pipermail/foaf-protocols/attachments/20100513/8eb518fe/attachment.pgp 


More information about the foaf-protocols mailing list