Re: Finding and Reminding, tech issues, 3.0 and beyond

[Bastien Nocera <hadess hadess net>]

On Thu, 2010-04-15 at 10:34 -0400, Jamie McCracken wrote:
> Is it entirely true that RDF/Sparql, whilst giving us the power to model
> stuff better, is harder to use and makes things more difficult to devs
> who dont know it
> 
> I had always imagined there would be a client library that did not
> expose RDF/SParql which would allow for more simple use and queries
> (query by example or some simpler language). It would be much more
> limiting than pure sparql but for the majority of apps where metadata
> use is one dimensional it would suffice.
> 
> However it would be wrong to scrap RDF/Sparql as you could not model
> links between resources nor interact as well with non-file cloud based
> data. Also by utilising nepomuk ontology, we are benefiting from the
> large EU investment in it and the refinements from Nokia/KDE which
> ensure the ontology is application driven and not purely theoretical in
> nature
> 
> The apple metadata spec is one dimensional and could not be extrapolated
> easily to model more sophisticated ontologies. Tracker 0.6 metadata was
> like apples and it proved insufficient for the needs of Nokia and
> Nepomuk

You completely missed the point. I never said that Apple's metadata spec
was good, I said their docs were.