3 ms·

RDF, RDF, RDF, RDF, RDF, RDF, RDF. Yes. Please use RDF. And please use a common vocabulary. If you want to know how to do this? Have a look at the UK governm

RDF, RDF, RDF, RDF, RDF, RDF, RDF. Yes. Please use RDF. And please use a common vocabulary. If you want to know how to do this? Have a look at the UK governments open data portal (which uses RDF): data.gov.uk And their SPARQL (query) endpoint: http://data.gov.uk/sparql http://data.gov.uk/sparql

jessriedel 14y ago
Is this what you're talking about? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_Description_Framework http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_Description_Framework I'm interested in knowing a little more about why you like it so much.
- hmottestad 14y ago
  RDF is a graph based data format (serialised to XML). It is based on triples. Such as: Peter hasParent Paal. To query RDF, we use the graph query language SPARQL. You create a graph with variables in it, and the query engine will find subgraphs that match the graph. On top of this we can do reasoning (based on 1st order logics and datalog). With RDFS (simple) and OWL (advanced). And to bring all this together there are many open vocabularies and open data sets linked together. One notable one: DBpedia (based on wikipedia). A grand view of linked data: http://lod-cloud.net/versions/2011-09-19/lod-cloud.html http://lod-cloud.net/versions/2011-09-19/lod-cloud.html A sample SPARQL query on DBpedia listing software by date: http://dbpedia.org/sparql?default-graph-uri=http%3A%2F%2Fdbpedia.org&query=select+%3Fa+min%28%3Fb%29+%28min%28%3Fdate%29+as+%3Fdate2%29+where+%7B%0D%0A%0D%0A%3Fa+a+dbpedia-owl%3ASoftware%3B%0D%0A+rdfs%3Alabel+%3Fb%3B%0D%0Adbpedia-owl%3AlatestReleaseDate+%3Fdate.%0D%0A%0D%0A%0D%0A%0D%0A%7D+%0D%0Agroup+by+%3Fa%0D%0Aorder+by+%3Fdate2%0D%0ALIMIT+100&format=text%2Fhtml&timeout=0&debug=on http://dbpedia.org/sparql?default-graph-uri=http%3A%2F%2Fdbp... The actual query: select ?a min(?b) (min(?date) as ?date2) where { ?a a dbpedia-owl:Software; rdfs:label ?b; dbpedia-owl:latestReleaseDate ?date. } group by ?a order by ?date2 LIMIT 100
  - jessriedel 14y ago
    Hey this is really cool. Thanks.
acqq 14y ago
Is that a joke? RDF and SPARQL look exactly like something even mother has problem to love. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPARQL http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPARQL My personal preference is, whenever there's a lot of records to be processed, a tab separated UTF-8 text file. (I admit I am biased as I like to use Perl for first passes).
- hmottestad 14y ago
  Nope. Not a joke. Lots of love from all over the world: http://lod-cloud.net/ http://lod-cloud.net/ The number one difference between RDF and CSV (TSV in you case) is that it's understandable by a computer. CSV is simple parsable, while RDF comes with all the meta data the computer needs.
  - acqq 14y ago
    Everything is readable by computer, if you have the program which reads it. For tabular data nobody needs the name of each field in every line. For non-tabular data, why not using JSON?
    - hmottestad 14y ago
      Understandable. RDF is understandable by computers. It brings it's semantics along. CSV is only syntax. It doesn't even support datatypes. JSON is simply a data format serialisation. RDF can be serialised to JSON or to XML if you wish.
Homunculiheaded 14y ago
RDF took Prolog clauses, restricted them to triplets, and made their representation dramatically more verbose. Then it removed the reasoning engine part of logic programming and replaced it with OWL which is by default computationally intractable. I have tried for many, many years to learn to appreciate RDF and semantic technologies in general, but everytime I get involved it screams of a problem desperately looking for a solution, and whose general case of the problem (reasoning about relations) was already solved better decades ago (and with the recent revived interested in logic/relational programming seems likely to improve soon). If you want to represent a graph structure in your data why not sets of json objects? Sure you end up with an ad hoc vocabulary, but I've never seen a successful project make use of the RDF ideal of massively shared vocabularies.
- hmottestad 14y ago
  JSON doesn't really support datatypes. So not really useful for sending data to someone else. Even simple things such as float vs. double will be a challenge. Not to mention dates or locations. Pity you haven't gotten to like it. It's being tested on a lot of stuff, some sticks some doesn't. And OWL has a number of subsets for whatever complexity you feel like enjoying.
smrtinsert 14y ago
Deep in the clearance bin of web technologies (looking at you xhtml) lies like RDF and SPARQL. The only reason governments use it is for job security and because only they have the endless budgets to bother with it.
ejain 14y ago
I much prefer the RDF graph data model over the document-centric tree model of JSON or XML for representing data. It's too bad the need for RDF to be a solid formal knowledge representation format trumped more practical concerns (like being able to represent an ordered list in a simple manner).

jessriedel 14y ago

Is this what you're talking about? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_Description_Framework http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_Description_Framework I'm interested in knowing a little more about why you like it so much.

hmottestad 14y ago
RDF is a graph based data format (serialised to XML). It is based on triples. Such as: Peter hasParent Paal. To query RDF, we use the graph query language SPARQL. You create a graph with variables in it, and the query engine will find subgraphs that match the graph. On top of this we can do reasoning (based on 1st order logics and datalog). With RDFS (simple) and OWL (advanced). And to bring all this together there are many open vocabularies and open data sets linked together. One notable one: DBpedia (based on wikipedia). A grand view of linked data: http://lod-cloud.net/versions/2011-09-19/lod-cloud.html http://lod-cloud.net/versions/2011-09-19/lod-cloud.html A sample SPARQL query on DBpedia listing software by date: http://dbpedia.org/sparql?default-graph-uri=http%3A%2F%2Fdbpedia.org&query=select+%3Fa+min%28%3Fb%29+%28min%28%3Fdate%29+as+%3Fdate2%29+where+%7B%0D%0A%0D%0A%3Fa+a+dbpedia-owl%3ASoftware%3B%0D%0A+rdfs%3Alabel+%3Fb%3B%0D%0Adbpedia-owl%3AlatestReleaseDate+%3Fdate.%0D%0A%0D%0A%0D%0A%0D%0A%7D+%0D%0Agroup+by+%3Fa%0D%0Aorder+by+%3Fdate2%0D%0ALIMIT+100&format=text%2Fhtml&timeout=0&debug=on http://dbpedia.org/sparql?default-graph-uri=http%3A%2F%2Fdbp... The actual query: select ?a min(?b) (min(?date) as ?date2) where { ?a a dbpedia-owl:Software; rdfs:label ?b; dbpedia-owl:latestReleaseDate ?date. } group by ?a order by ?date2 LIMIT 100
- jessriedel 14y ago
  Hey this is really cool. Thanks.

acqq 14y ago

Is that a joke? RDF and SPARQL look exactly like something even mother has problem to love. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPARQL http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPARQL My personal preference is, whenever there's a lot of records to be processed, a tab separated UTF-8 text file. (I admit I am biased as I like to use Perl for first passes).

hmottestad 14y ago
Nope. Not a joke. Lots of love from all over the world: http://lod-cloud.net/ http://lod-cloud.net/ The number one difference between RDF and CSV (TSV in you case) is that it's understandable by a computer. CSV is simple parsable, while RDF comes with all the meta data the computer needs.
- acqq 14y ago
  Everything is readable by computer, if you have the program which reads it. For tabular data nobody needs the name of each field in every line. For non-tabular data, why not using JSON?
  - hmottestad 14y ago
    Understandable. RDF is understandable by computers. It brings it's semantics along. CSV is only syntax. It doesn't even support datatypes. JSON is simply a data format serialisation. RDF can be serialised to JSON or to XML if you wish.

Homunculiheaded 14y ago

RDF took Prolog clauses, restricted them to triplets, and made their representation dramatically more verbose. Then it removed the reasoning engine part of logic programming and replaced it with OWL which is by default computationally intractable. I have tried for many, many years to learn to appreciate RDF and semantic technologies in general, but everytime I get involved it screams of a problem desperately looking for a solution, and whose general case of the problem (reasoning about relations) was already solved better decades ago (and with the recent revived interested in logic/relational programming seems likely to improve soon). If you want to represent a graph structure in your data why not sets of json objects? Sure you end up with an ad hoc vocabulary, but I've never seen a successful project make use of the RDF ideal of massively shared vocabularies.

hmottestad 14y ago
JSON doesn't really support datatypes. So not really useful for sending data to someone else. Even simple things such as float vs. double will be a challenge. Not to mention dates or locations. Pity you haven't gotten to like it. It's being tested on a lot of stuff, some sticks some doesn't. And OWL has a number of subsets for whatever complexity you feel like enjoying.

smrtinsert 14y ago

Deep in the clearance bin of web technologies (looking at you xhtml) lies like RDF and SPARQL. The only reason governments use it is for job security and because only they have the endless budgets to bother with it.

ejain 14y ago

I much prefer the RDF graph data model over the document-centric tree model of JSON or XML for representing data. It's too bad the need for RDF to be a solid formal knowledge representation format trumped more practical concerns (like being able to represent an ordered list in a simple manner).