<snip> > I assume we agree that mapping should be at the conceptual level while > interchange formats remain negotiable. In a sense, the pursuit of a > normative interchange format is inherently mercurial, but not so re. > conceptual schema :-) </snip>
>From my POV, the principle of Hypermedia Factors[1] is one possible way to define a conceptual agreement that is not bound to a single media type or data format. [1] http://amundsen.com/hypermedia/hfactor/ mca http://amundsen.com/blog/ http://twitter....@mamund http://mamund.com/foaf.rdf#me #RESTFest 2010 http://rest-fest.googlecode.com On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 14:04, Kingsley Idehen <[email protected]> wrote: > On 11/10/10 1:16 PM, Alan Ruttenberg wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 10:14 AM, Kingsley Idehen > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Alan / John: maybe we could use this thread to arrive at obvious common > ground re. data integration and the diminishing need for a syntax level > lingua franca. > > Kingsley includes me presumably because of a response to an earlier > message, not copied to this list. > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-lod/2010Nov/0322.html > > Correct. > > I think there *is* a need for a lingua franca for intercomputer > communication. But I support the idea that there should be alternative > syntaxes (as long as they can be clearly translated to the lingua > franca). > > I assume we agree that mapping should be at the conceptual level while > interchange formats remain negotiable. In a sense, the pursuit of a > normative interchange format is inherently mercurial, but not so re. > conceptual schema :-) > > Best, > Alan > > > > -- > > Regards, > > Kingsley Idehen > President& CEO > OpenLink Software > Web: http://www.openlinksw.com > Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen > Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen > > > -- > > Regards, > > Kingsley Idehen > President & CEO > OpenLink Software > Web: http://www.openlinksw.com > Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen > Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen > > > > >
