On Tue, September 4, 2012 12:44, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
> On 9/4/12 12:13 PM, doug foxvog wrote:
>> On Mon, September 3, 2012 11:48, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>>> On 9/3/12 10:02 AM, Michael Brunnbauer wrote:
>>>> On Sun, Sep 02, 2012 at 10:43:22AM -0400, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>>>>> Let's start with RDF, what is it actually?
>>>> [...]
>>>>> Its about the entity-attribute-value model enhanced with explicit
>>>>> semantics.
>>>> OK.
>>>>> Yes! They decided that it was beneficial to
>>>>> conflate RDF and Linked Data, even though history provides ample
>>>>> evidence for the folly inherent in such thinking and execution
>>>>> strategy.
>>>> Aha. OK.
>>>>> Linked Data is trying to achieve this goal. It isn't RDF syntax or
>>>>> serialization specific. Its basically the entity-attribute-value
>>>>> model
>>>>> enhanced with URIs and explicit semantics re.
>>>>> subject-predicate-object
>>>>> or entity-attribute-value.
>>>> You said that "RDF is about the entity-attribute-value model enhanced
>>>> with
>>>> explicit semantics" and that RDF should not be conflated with Linked
>>>> Data and
>>>> now you say that Linked Data "is basically the entity-attribute-value
>>>> model
>>>> enhanced with URIs and explicit semantics". I don't get it.
>>> Because you already get it. What I mean by that comment is the fact
>>> that
>>> you already understand what RDF actually is.
>> I'm wondering if Kingsley gets Michael at this point. Michael is
>> arguing
>> against "what RDF actually is". Yet Kingsley goes back to a syntax
>> discussion.
>
> Please. I do know the difference between a model and syntax.
>
> RDF has a model distinct from syntaxes such as: RDF/XML, Turtle, N3,
> N-Triples, HTML5+MicroData, RDFa, TriX, TriG, NQuads etc..
>
> Things exist, they do so in quantities, and said things are denoted
> using a naming mechanism. Nothing exists on its own. Everything is
> in a relationship. The aforementioned relationships are endowed
> with Semantics. (01)
Agreed.. (02)
> We just want to express the above in a form that human and machine
> comprehensible. Natural Language (imperfect as it is when written or
> spoken) has worked for humans. Never been so for machines, so we are
> trying to solve that problem. (03)
Fine. (04)
>>> ...
>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linked_data talks about "useful
>>>> information
>>>> using
>>>> standard formats". This could be anything - for example 7-tuples with
>>>> implicit
>>>> semantics. I don't see why Linked Data should be about EAV and
>>>> explicit
>>>> semantics and what the difference to RDF would be. (05)
>>> Note point #3 reads:
>>> Provide useful information about the thing when its URI is
>>> dereferenced, using standard formats such as RDF/XML. (06)
>>> Of course in reality, we have to decompose further and
>>> it should really mean: (07)
>> "should" ??? (08)
>>> Useful information == structured data (entity-attribute-value
>>> or RDF model constrained) (09)
>> Do you really think that only data using an RDF model is useful? How
>> can you equate the two? (010)
> I mean: utility comes from delivering value to a consumer.
> Thus, useful information to a human or machine has to be
> something they can comprehend. (011)
We agree about humans. I wouldn't yet claim that a machine
can "comprehend" information. But i don't really think that
you are claiming that. I interpret you to mean that the
machine has one or more methods for processing the data. (012)
> Structured Data is useful. (013)
Agreed. (014)
> Data where Entity, Attribute, Attribute Values, and the semantics
> are the triad/triples (015)
I see no need for a restriction to EAV. (016)
> are discernible to humans and/or machines is extremely useful. (017)
Having semantics discernible to humans and/or machines is extremely
useful. Agreed. But i would say that it is equally useful whether or not
the semantics are formatted as triples. (018)
> Even more so, when it scales to the Web. (019)
Agreed. (020)
>> Here you say that the Linked Data description SHOULD be restricted to
>> the RDF model. The Linked Data description is NOT so narrow. (021)
> I said: its should be structured data. Data cannot be structured if it
> isn't constrained by some kind of model. You have to be able to discern
> (in the finest-grained mode possible) what constitutes the data in order
> for it to be useful. (022)
Agreed. (023)
>> This is what Michael is arguing against. This seems like the RDF
>> zealotry that Kingsley was criticizing elsewhere. (024)
>>> Formats: various, which means a variety of syntaxes and serialization
>>> formats for structured data. (025)
>> Structure does NOT require RDF structure. (026)
> Of course it doesn't. But there's no harm in structure making an Entity,
> its Attributes, Attribute Values, and Relationship (027)
Isn't this the RDF structure? (028)
> Semantics discernible to humans and/or machines. (029)
Agreed that there is no harm in making EAV/RDF structures discernible. (030)
I also claim that there is no harm in making n-tuple structures
discernible to humans and/or machines. (031)
Do you find a harm in so doing? (032)
-- doug f (033)
> Kingsley
>>
>> -- doug f
>>
>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Michael Brunnbauer
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Kingsley Idehen
>>> Founder & CEO
>>> OpenLink Software
>>> Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
>>> Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
>>> Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
>>> Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
>>> LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>>> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
>>> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
>>> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>>> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
>>>
>>
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
>> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
>> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> Regards,
>
> Kingsley Idehen
> Founder & CEO
> OpenLink Software
> Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
> Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
> Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
> Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
> LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
> (034)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J (035)
|