Why Not a New Format?

Thinking about what is keeping RDF from wider adoption, I keep coming back to the fact that the serialization is, well, too complex. Why hasn't anyone stepped up to propose a XML syntax that plays well with the thousands of XML tools out there? Let the XML folk say, "I can for the simple syntax, I stayed for the powerful model."

The RDF people out there always chant, "It's the model, stupid!" Yes, indeed, and what a simple, powerful, and scalable model it is. It's certainly why people latch onto RDF. The model is RDF's selling point.

However, to get it adopted, it's the serialization that must be refactored. People are used to "Right click, view source", and the only way that will work in the semantic web is if the XML for RDF is simple and consistent and predictable. The fact that the same RDF model can be serialized into numerous different, yet semantically equivalent, is enough to drive anyone away. This is a serious bug with RDF and should be fixed.

The fact that I can't write an XSLT script for RDF/XML boggles my mind. There can no longer be a "RDF or XML" debate. That argument exists because XML proponents think in terms of tags and documents and schemas and DTDs. RDF/XML does not play in that world, and it is holding back RDF as a model.

Some might argue that RDF as model is the important part, not necessarily the syntax. "It's just computers talking to each other anyway" is a common cry. This argument forgets that the web took off because each and every user was able to see the source of the web page they were looking at. It was easy to cut and paste our way to mass adoption. Being able to look at a syntax played a major part in the success of the web. RDF needs this equivalent feature.

So my question is simply, why is no one at the W3C working on this right now? The next version of RDF needs to include a working serialization in XML that fixes the current bugs:


  • simple XML

  • consistent

  • validatable against a schema

  • predictable output of model



Maybe the better question is, how can I help? Is this on the W3C's plate?

Please, W3C, create a standard RDF serialization that elevates RDF as a first class citizen of XML. Everyone else has a schema, why can't we?

Popular posts from this blog

Lists and arrays in Dart

(This is Part 3 in a series about Dart. Check out Part 2, Function in Dart .) Warning : We expect the Dart libraries to undergo potentially sweeping changes before Dart goes to alpha. This document is relevant as of 2011-12-22. Intro Dart is a "batteries included" effort to help app developers build modern web apps. An important "battery" is the bundled core Dart libraries, providing common and rich functionality. Dart is building a solution for large, complex web apps, and providing well tested, integrated, and common libraries is key to helping a web app developer be more productive out of the box. The Collection libraries are a crucial set of APIs that Dart developers get for free. Much more than simple arrays and maps, the Collection library includes standard ways to filter, iterate, inspect, compose, and sort your data. This post specifically looks at List<E> , Dart's ordered, indexable collection of objects. Aside: The Dart project is lucky
Read more

Converting Array to List in Scala

Now, this has to have a built-in somewhere in Scala , because it just seems too common. So, how to convert an Array to a List in Scala? Why do I need this? I needed to drop to Java for some functionality, which in this case returns an Array. I wanted to get that Array into a List to practice my functional programming skillz. **Update**: I figured out how to convert Arrays to Lists the Scala way. Turns out it's a piece of cake. val myList = List.fromArray(Array("one", "two", "three")) or val myList = Array("one","two","three").elements.toList The call to elements returns an Iterator , and from there you can convert to a List via toList . Nice. Because my first version wasn't actually tail recursive, what follows is a true tail recursive solution, if I were to implement this by hand. The above, built in mechanism is much better, though. object ArrayUtil { def toList[a](array: Array[a]): List[a] = { d
Read more

Null-aware operators in Dart

Image
Three new language features just landed in the latest dev channel build of the Dart ! Collectively known as null-aware operators , these new features will help you reduce the code required to work with potentially null objects. I'm excited for these new abilities, because typing less is always a good thing. Read on to learn more, and be sure to try these new features on Dart Pad . ?? Use ?? when you want to evaluate and return an expression IFF another expression resolves to null. exp ?? otherExp is similar to ((x) => x == null ? otherExp : x)(exp) ??= Use ??= when you want to assign a value to an object IFF that object is null. Otherwise, return the object. obj ??= value is similar to ((x) => x == null ? obj = value : x)(obj) ?. Use ?. when you want to call a method/getter on an object IFF that object is not null (otherwise, return null). obj?.method() is similar to ((x) => x == null ? null : x.method())(obj) Yo
Read more