I worry that that 'ease' is the same kind of obfuscation that RDF/XML is
often criticized for. When those individuals gaze upon JSON-LD, do they
see JSON or RDF?
Best,
Kevin
On 9/3/15 4:18 PM, Bernadette Hyland wrote:
+1 David, well said.
Amazing how much the mention of JSON (in the phase JSON-LD) puts people
at ease vs. RDF <anything>. JSON-LD as a Recommendation has helped
lower the defenses of many who used to get their hackles up and say ‘RDF
is too hard'.
Perception counts for a lot, even for highly technical people including
Web developers.
Cheers,
Bernadette Hyland
CEO, 3 Round Stones, Inc.
http://3roundstones.com || http://about.me/bernadettehyland
On Sep 3, 2015, at 1:03 PM, David Booth <da...@dbooth.org
<mailto:da...@dbooth.org>> wrote:
Side note: RDF/XML was the first RDF serialization standardized, over
15 years ago, at a time when XML was all the buzz. Since then other
serializations have been standardized that are far more human friendly
to read and write, and easier for programmers to use, such as Turtle
and JSON-LD.
However, even beyond ease of use, one of the biggest problems with
RDF/XML that I and others have seen over the years is that it misleads
people into thinking that RDF is a dialect of XML, and it is not. I'm
sure this misconception was reinforced by the unfortunate depiction of
XML in the foundation of the (now infamous) semantic web layer cake of
2001, which in hindsight is just plain wrong:
http://www.w3.org/2001/09/06-ecdl/slide17-0.html
(Admittedly JSON-LD may run a similar risk, but I think that risk is
mitigated now by the fact that RDF is already more established in its
own right.)
I encourage all RDF publishers to use one of the other standard RDF
formats such as Turtle or JSON-LD. All commonly used RDF tools now
support Turtle, and many or most already support JSON-LD.
RDF/XML is not officially deprecated, but I personally hope that in
the next round of RDF updates, we will quietly thank RDF/XML for its
faithful service and mark it as deprecated.
David Booth
