Comparing RDF and a Mac or iPhone user interface is just silly. A more
reasonable comparison is the RDF stack and the SQL stack where there are large
standardized specs with hundreds of pages of vendor-specific extensions to
understand. Why isn't David complaining about that I wonder? (01)
I find it amusing how these claims of huge complexity contrast with our
experience of 4 days training being plenty to get people being productive with
the languages and our TopBraid tool. (02)
Cheers,
David (03)
David Price
UK +44 7788 561308
US +1 336 283 0606 (04)
> On 30 Nov 2013, at 02:46 pm, John F Sowa <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Pat and David,
>
> PH
>> David, by all means, you go on doing whatever it is you do with JCL, and
>> the rest of the world can be doing semantic things with RDF and OWL.
>
> David's point is actually well taken: for something as simple as RDF,
> the complexity is not in the language, but in the choices about what
> to describe and what aspects to represent.
>
> A typical JCL card, for example, has the following syntax:
>
> '//' Name Relation List
>
> The most common relation is DD for data definition. All the complexity
> lies in the list of options. For a subject is as complex as OS/360
> and its successors, the simplicity of the language is irrelevant.
>
> DE
>> How do the so called semantics of RDF make it any easier for a newbie
>> to understand the intent of what the code is doing or supposed to do?
>
> Macintosh is supposedly easy -- but the primary reason is that Steve J.
> eliminated all options (at least for most users). But under the covers
> of OS X, there is all the complexity of Unix.
>
> The fundamental problem of ontology is managing the complexity --
> and doing so in a way that people can understand.
>
> Steve J's greatest talent was in making simple tasks simple,
> sweeping the complexity under the rug, and keeping it there. *
>
> John
>
> * PS: At least for the average user. The original Macintosh was
> built on a nightmare of spaghetti code. Unix, by comparison, was
> a huge simplification for the programmers who did the dirty work.
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
> (05)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (06)
|