Danny Ayers wrote:
> On 28/02/07, Ben Adida <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Danny Ayers wrote:
>>> David, one quick question - does Exhibit already expose RDF in any form?
>>>
>>> If not, RDFa (and/or eRDF) is pretty much as good as exposing it in
>>> any form, thanks to GRDDL.
>> I'd say it's better, but I'm biased :)
>>
>> It's better because it gives you the locality property where, with the
>> right tool, you can point and click to a row in the table and get the
>> related metadata. With GRDDL, you lose the relationship between the
>> rendered and the structured.
> 
> If that's important information, it should be captured in the GRDDLing
> - why should it be lost?

Guys, please, let's color the bikeshed another time.

There is really no point in arguing which approach is better to RDFize
information: if it works for you, great, if not use something else that
does. And if nothing does, create your own.

Personally, I dislike GRDDL as long as it keeps ties to XSLT, as XSLT is
a *horrible* way to write RDFizers compared to, say, javascript. [and
it's not for lack of XSLT knowledge that I say so]

If there was a standardized object model for RDF stores in javascript
(sort of a DOM for RDF), then you could imagine having cross-platform
GRDDL in javascript (and yes, I'm aware that W3C wants to standardize
that), but for now you're stuck with XSLT.

So, Ben says RDFa is better because more explicit, you say GRDDL is
better because allows you to RDFize even stuff that is not RDF to start
with (like microformats) and I say that scraping is better than GRDDL
because I can use a real programming language and because I don't need
to have any RDF buy-in from the data publisher.

Still, there is room for all the approaches, as they don't really
prevent the others from being beneficial as GRDDL is way easier to
perform on RDFa content than on microformats (one GRDDL xslt stylesheet
would work for all RDFa pages!), scraping is way easier on both RDFa and
GRDDL-ed content (the scraper could simply use the GRDDL stylesheet when
found or parse the RDFa directly when found).

Here David is asking "what is the benefit of RDFa" and given the ability
we have to scrape anything we want out of any page, it's a rather fair
and subtly demanding question, IMO.

What I would like to see is exhibit supporting RDFa content embedded in
the same HTML page. This means that one can have an exhibit out of an
RDFa page just by simply adding a few lines, no need for an external
JSON file (which would also make the content useful to google and to any
other crawler that is exhibit aware).

Right now, to have an RDF export from Exhibit, you have to run it! which
means that you can do that automatically only from very advanced
crawlers like Crowbar. (which is why the json data is dark matter to
crawlers today)

Before Crowbar, we were kinda stuck in looking for <link> tags in the
exhibit pages (or heuristically parsing the js files for URLs that
terminated with "js"), now we can just invoke the Exhibit object and the
exporters programmatically.

But I continue to think that having RDFa data embedded right in the page
could be useful.

-- 
Stefano Mazzocchi
Digital Libraries Research Group                 Research Scientist
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
E25-131, 77 Massachusetts Ave               skype: stefanomazzocchi
Cambridge, MA  02139-4307, USA         email: stefanom at mit . edu
-------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
General mailing list
[email protected]
http://simile.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/general

Reply via email to