David Booth wrote:
A heated debate has been raging about the accepted meaning
of the term "Linked Data" in the context of the Semantic
Web community -- whether or not this term implies the use
of RDF.
Pointless, or are you going to do trademark the term and sue anybody who
uses it to refer to anything other than RDF?
It boils down to some people saying "we made/use this, use it too" and
others saying "we'd like to use this too, it does the same job and is
compatible", and Kingsley and some others saying "we can integrate it
all why worry".
Axioms of tolerance, and modular design apply here:
a) tolerate other over the wires types
b) RDF is part of a modular design, namely linked data and the semantic web.
So RDF may spring to mind when you say Linked Data, given it's so
prevalent, but Linked Data refers to a set of things, RDF is just one of
them.
