Take a look at the bottom right of the diagram (e.g. the JPEG version it says:
Some projects are better suited for XML data; others scream out for RDF. RDF will not replace XML, each has its advantages in certain scenarios.
My question is simple: what makes a project scream out for RDF? What property of an application or its data make it better suited to an RDF rather than an XML vocabulary?
I honestly don’t have any feeling for the right answers.
I’m working with RDF tools now, but thats because FOAF is an RDF vocabulary. I’m just using the right tools for the job. If I was given a task to design a new system I don’t have any feel for why I might choose RDF over XML. I haven’t had that “aha” moment yet.
We might loosely classify markup vocabularies into three types:
- Pure XML vocabularies
- RDF Friendly vocabularies, e.g. RSS 1.0
- Pure RDF vocabularies
And we could then generalise the question to: which type of vocabulary is best suited to which applications? Are RDF Friendly vocabularies just a transition step?
And if RDF will never supplant XML, then surely we’re going to have to invest a lot of time in RDF Data Mining?
I’ve been wondering whether the answer might be in Shelley’s book somewhere, but haven’t had time to get beyond the opening chapter.
Maybe I’m just being dumb, I dunno. But I’d love to know what others think.