On 2014-10-01 21:51, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
On 10/1/14 2:42 PM, Sarven Capadisli wrote:can't use them along with schema.org.I favour plain HTML+CSS+RDFa to get things going e.g.: https://github.com/csarven/linked-researchWhat about: HTML+CSS+(RDFa | Microdata | JSON-LD | TURTLE) ? Basically, we have to get to: HTML+CSS+(Any RDF Notation) .
Sure, why not!
The above is possible because we now have standardization of <link/>, <script/> etc.. in HTML that makes this possible. I wouldn't single out RDFa in this quest. History has shown that whenever we single anything out anything, at the notation level, we inevitably open up a new format centric war. These wars simply protract all the confusion that swirls around RDF :)
I agree and that's all fine. I've only proposed one particular solution that made the most sense to me. Going from one to another is not an issue either. People are going to do whatever is convenient or suitable for them in the end (just like LaTeX->PDF).
The primary problem is not about solving x in HTML+CSS+x, but that HTML+CSS is not even an option to begin with for "major" "international" "Semantic Web" conferences to better preserve and foster smart identification and discovery of research components. Reproducibility suffers along the way. There is absolutely nothing worthwhile we can query for from past SW/LD research.
-Sarven
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
