On 22 Dec 2011, at 22:33, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
> On 12/22/11 4:28 PM, Patrick Logan wrote:
>>
>> The WebID incubation effort is documented at http://www.w3.org/wiki/WebID
>> and there is a discussion on the mail list about supporting the Turtle
>> format. We are looking for input from members of the linked data community
>> generally.
>>
>> Currently RDF/XML and XHTML+RDFa 1.1 are required for consumers of WebID
>> profiles/pages. Support for Turtle would probably be worded as a required
>> addition to these other formats.
>>
>> The incremental cost of supporting Turtle seems fairly low, given support
>> for RDF/XML.
>>
>> Do readers of this list foresee any significant issues with this addition?
>> Would you recommend this addition?
>>
>> Thanks
>> -Patrick
>>
>
> To get the ball rolling.
> +1 re., giving Turtle and RDF/XML equal billing.
Stephane Corlosquet had a good idea on the webid mailing list which is
summarised as
MUST support both for consumers, deprecate RDF/XML for publishers, and remove
the example
RDF/XML from the spec.
The reason we are asking the wider community is that we want WebID to be an
entry point
for people from social networks into the LinkedData community. So even though
all our tools
can support every format, if we put that into the spec there is much too high a
risk of
cognitive dissonance.
There is an extra very good reason for putting Turtle up there, and that is that
we have a simple SPARQL example in the spec
http://webid.info/spec#verifying-the-webid-claim
and so that makes understanding for newbies easier.
Henry
>
> --
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
>
>
Social Web Architect
http://bblfish.net/
