2 ms·
I don't know how much that counts but every time I had to interact with RDF data I wanted to pull my eyeballs out of my sockets pretty much for the whole thing.
by jcelerier 5y ago
I don't know how much that counts but every time I had to interact with RDF data I wanted to pull my eyeballs out of my sockets pretty much for the whole thing. Also, the idea that human knowledge can be categorized seems very laughable to me - I don't know of any RDF specification or ontology that holds in practice ; too many people have too many incompatible definitions for things and there is never one better than the others.
- feanaro 5y agoYes, but that's a deeper problem with the very concept of ontologies and not with RDF itself. As long as you keep the scope limited, that is you do not try to "categorize all human knowledge ever, consistently", ontologies can be used effectively.
- adamzwasserman 5y agoSo you are not really arguing that human knowledge cannot be categorized. In fact you are sort of arguing the opposite: Human knowledge lends itself so well to categorization that a single ontology is impossible (if it was really hard to categorize, there would be no or few ontologies).