Slashdot Mirror
Practical RDF
RDF first hit my radar screen a couple of years ago while I was working on a barebones tool to manage my personal website. I was writing the code to generate RSS feeds ("What is RSS?") for my site and had to choose whether to support RSS 0.9x (non-RDF) or RSS 1.0 (RDF-based) or both. Long story short: I went with RSS 1.0 and was able to implement the feeds, but never got any further into RDF afterwards. I couldn't make headway through the RDF-related working drafts rapidly enough to justify the time that I was spending, there weren't any worthwhile-looking books available at the time, and the few online tutorials that I found were sorely lacking -- possibly because the specs themselves were still evolving as the RDF Core Working Group hashed out some remaining issues.
Fast forward a few years: the dust in RDF-land seems to be settling a bit (although new working drafts of all of the current RDF specs were released on September 5th, most of the changes from previous versions appear to be relatively minor) and, with the publication of Shelley Powers' Practical RDF: Solving Problems with the Resource Description Framework, there's finally a good book available on the subject.
Overview After an introductory chapter that touches on the history of RDF and some applications of RDF/XML (the preferred, W3C-blessed serialization of RDF), the book is divided into three broad sections. In the first, the reader is guided through the raft of documentation produced by the RDF Core WG, including : Resource Description Framework (RDF): Concepts and Abstract Data Model, RDF/XML Syntax Specification, RDF Model Theory (formerly Semantics), and RDF Vocabulary Description Language 1.0: RDF Schema. Before moving on to Part II, where she surveys programming language support and tools available for working with RDF (with code snippets where appropriate), Powers spends a chapter developing an RDF vocabulary, "PostCon," that's used throughout the remainder of the book for demo purposes.Chapter 7, the first in the tools-focused portion of Practical RDF is dedicated to (mostly Java-based) editors, parsers, validators, browsers, etc. for desktop use. Next, she dives into Jena, the Java RDF toolkit that began life as the labor of love of HP Labs researcher Brian McBride before being elevated to the status of a formal HP Labs project under their Semantic Web Research umbrella. Another HP Labs Semantic Web project, Damian Steer's BrownSauce, a slick little Java-based RDF browser, was introduced back in Chapter7. Means for manipulating RDF/XML in Perl (RDF::Core, part of Ginger Alliance's PerlRDF project), PHP (RAP, the RDF API for PHP), and Python (RDFLib) are addressed in Chapter 9. RDF query engines/languages are taken up next -- rdfDB QL, the query language of R.V. Guha's rdfDB (written in C); SquishQL, implemented in the Java-based Inkling query engine (built atop PostgreSQL); RDQL, used within Jena; and Sesame, a JSP/Servlet querying engine that supports both RDQL and its own query language, RQL, and can be deployed atop MySQL or PostgreSQL. Powers rounds out this part of her book with a chapter that deals briefly with the leftovers. Drive, an RDF API for C#, is briefly discussed along with RDF APIs for less fashionable programming languages : Nokia's Wilbur for CLOS, XOTcl for Tcl, and RubyRDF for Ruby. Redland, an RDF toolkit written in C with Java, Perl, PHP, Python, Ruby, and Tcl wrappers, is covered at some length (about half a dozen pages) and a couple more are given over to Redfoot, a Python RDF framework consisting of RDFLib (mentioned earlier in the Perl/PHP/Python chapter), a small-footprint HTTP server (according to the changelog at redfoot.net, they're using Medusa), and a native scripting language called Hypercode that lives within CDATA blocks in RDF/XML (example).
The last third of Practical RDF is devoted to uses of RDF and begins with a chapter on the OWL Web Ontology Language, an extension to RDF that's designed to supply more constraints for RDF vocabularies than can be provided by RDF Schema alone. This chapter would have been better situated after Chapter 5, which addresses RDF Schema, and feels a bit out of place here. RSS 1.0, the RDF-based syndication format, gets a chapter all of its own, beginning with a short synopsis of the evolution of RSS and the rift between the RSS 0.9x/2.0 and RSS 1.0 camps, progressing through descriptions of the RSS elements, some discussion of the use of modules, RSS autodiscovery, and aggregators (Amphetadesk, Meerkat, and NetNewsWire are mentioned), and finishing with an example RSS file (a syndicated list of book recommendations), producing RSS 1.0 using the Informa RSS Library (a set of Java classes), and merging two RSS 1.0 files using the XML::RSS Perl module. Two "Applications Based on RDF" (commercial and noncommercial) chapters top off the book. Noncommercial applications of RDF are visited first : Mozilla, where history and bookmarks, among other classes of information, are stored in RDF; the Creative Commons licensing scheme, whose proponents encourage content creators to embed RDF snippets into their documents and applications to provide information about the work itself and the restrictions placed on its reuse under the particular CC license that they've chosen; a Java and PostgreSQL based digital library system jointly developed by MIT and HP that uses RDF; and FOAF (Friend-of-a-Friend), an RDF vocabulary designed to express personal information and interpersonal relationships. Among the list of commercial applications utilizing RDF that comprises the final chapter in the book is Chandler, the same as yet very-alpha personal information manager that's managed to garner multiple mentions on this site.
The VerdictThe real meat of Practical RDF, for me, was in Chapters 1 through 6 (plus the OWL chapter, Chapter 12). This is not to say that the material in the last 2/3 of the book isn't useful or interesting. The section on RDF software tools is a great annotated survey of what's out there right now ... and I would imagine that installing and testdriving each of the software applications featured in those chapters must have been an extremely time-consuming process. The chapters describing real-world applications of RDF could be useful to someone trying to convince a manager that RDF is a viable, widely-used technology. Given a choice, though, I would rather have seen those pages spent on additional coverage of RDF, RDFS, and OWL with more example RDF vocabularies developed (like PostCon, which the author formulated, then refined through RDFS and OWL). The displaced material could have been made available online at the author's site for the book. A lot of that information will become less accurate over time as the software evolves and people come up with more applications for RDF anyway.
All nitpicking aside, though, if you're looking for a book on RDF, then you can't go wrong with Shelley Powers' Practical RDF.
You can purchase Practical RDF from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.
Who is Tim Berners-Lee and what makes him an expert on the Interweb?
what does Radio Direction Finding have to do with the web?!!!
here
I have over 70 freaks, do you?
you all are a bunch of niggers. fuck off and die. NERDS.
XML hasn't been widely adapted yet, so lets go created ANOTHER pie in the sky standard based on it!
~udb
Amazon has this book for $8 more than bn.
Free shipping doesn't make up the difference...
There are some cheap used copies, however...
A guide to Practical Reality Distortion Fields?
Sign me up!
So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
A slashdot editor cut off his own penis and his tongue after drinking an infusion of the latest drugs craze to sweep Slashdot.
The 28-year-old, only named as CmdrT, from Halls of Slashdot drank a tea made with the hallucinogenic angels' trumpet plants.
His mother said: "CmdrT was behaving normally the whole day until he left the house and disappeared into the garden for a couple of minutes."
When he returned to the house he was wearing a towel wrapped around him and was bleeding heavily from his mouth and between his legs.
The emergency doctor who arrived a few minutes later said the student had cut off his penis and his tongue with garden shears and it was impossible to reattach the organs.
Dr Andreas Marneros, from the local psychiatric hospital the student was admitted to, said: "Andreas will have to receive psychological help for years. Tea from Angels' Trumpets is extremely dangerous as the drug cannot be dosed."
Angels' Trumpets, known for their fragrant and trumpet shaped flowers, have increasingly become popular as an alternative drug at Slashdot.
java + XML = demand for 4+ghz CPUs
hello ?
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
I thought it was the Robotech Defence Force. Now I feel cheated. :(
C - A language that combines the speed of assembly with the ease of use of assembly.
RDF is quite pratical - with or without the book. There are several hundred websites explaning how to use RDF in your application. There are classes for JAVA/PHP etc for this purpose. A interesting use of RSS is to integrate it with the IMAP, and get the latest email show up on your portal page.
Consensus is good, but informed dictatorship is better
Can be found using Dashboard!
--------
Free your mind.
RDF first hit my radar screen a couple of years ago
Was this meant to be a joke, since RDF also stands for Radio Direction Finding?
HH
RDF is a great idea. But it needs to loose the java and the XML. People who are attracted to those have no use for RDF--they want messages they can read without documentation. I know XML is more than that, but in the corporate world its attraction is "configuration files I can read after the author was outsourced".
There are two XML movements--one creating a kludgy layer of application bureaucracy and the other visionary. RDF presently combines the worst of both. Neither "side" really wants it. AI is happy with ontologies and the corporate world is happy with messages 100 times larger than the underlying network protocol. (Could be worse: ASN.1 anyone?)
*BUT* the underlying idea to RDF (ontologies for your metadata). RDF schema is really more important than RDF syntax. The idea is a simple model for describing metamodels. This fits in the same space as UML metamodels, and the Common Warehouse metamodels, only it is much more light weight and you can implement it with existing tools (you do have to use XML--eeeewww).
XML serves one good perpose--it makes s-expressions socially respectable in corporate world and for that I am greatful. They almost got Scheme in too (DSSSL), but the angle-bracket police got them. Too bad.
RDF can sneak in metaprogramming if you let it.
=googol=
To: Page@somewhere.com
From: Bob_Goatse@goatse.cx
Subject: Hello
<img src="http://goatse.cx/hello.jpg">
That ought to ruin your readership!
For a research project I've actually been doing a bit of reading about RDF and OWL yesterday. When you do, you occasionally come across these types of remarks.
> java + XML = demand for 4+ghz CPUs
Let's make one thing clear: RDF is not an instantiation of the XML syntax. You can use XML to transfer RDF statements, but for reasoning other, internal, representations are to be preferred.
As I'm working on a Prolog project that needs RDF I use the SWI-Prolog RDF library, which, according to
this recent paper (pdf)* speeds up processing 22 folds compared to using the RDF/XML serialization syntax. Please note that Mozilla uses Prolog+RDF as well.
(*) here's google's html version of the paper
Who is Tim Berners-Lee character and why does he use a stupid hyphen in his name? Also what makes him an expert on this Interweb thing?
[ Reply to This ]
The entertainment system was belting out the Beatles' "We Can Work It Out" when the phone rang. When Pete answered, his phone turned the sound down by sending a message to all the other local devices that had a volume control. His sister, Lucy, was on the line from the doctor's office: "Mom needs to see a specialist and then has to have a series of physical therapy sessions. Biweekly or something. I'm going to have my agent set up the appointments." Pete immediately agreed to share the chauffeuring.
BY MIGUEL SALMERON
At the doctor's office, Lucy instructed her Semantic Web agent through her handheld Web browser. The agent promptly retrieved information about Mom's prescribed treatment from the doctor's agent, looked up several lists of providers, and checked for the ones in-plan for Mom's insurance within a 20-mile radius of her home and with a rating of excellent or very good on trusted rating services. It then began trying to find a match between available appointment times (supplied by the agents of individual providers through their Web sites) and Pete's and Lucy's busy schedules. (The emphasized keywords indicate terms whose semantics, or meaning, were defined for the agent through the Semantic Web.)
In a few minutes the agent presented them with a plan. Pete didn't like it--University Hospital was all the way across town from Mom's place, and he'd be driving back in the middle of rush hour. He set his own agent to redo the search with stricter preferences about location and time. Lucy's agent, having complete trust in Pete's agent in the context of the present task, automatically assisted by supplying access certificates and shortcuts to the data it had already sorted through.
Almost instantly the new plan was presented: a much closer clinic and earlier times--but there were two warning notes. First, Pete would have to reschedule a couple of his less important appointments. He checked what they were--not a problem. The other was something about the insurance company's list failing to include this provider under physical therapists: "Service type and insurance plan status securely verified by other means," the agent reassured him. "(Details?)"
Lucy registered her assent at about the same moment Pete was muttering, "Spare me the details," and it was all set. (Of course, Pete couldn't resist the details and later that night had his agent explain how it had found that provider even though it wasn't on the proper list.)
Expressing Meaning
Pete and Lucy could use their agents to carry out all these tasks thanks not to the World Wide Web of today but rather the Semantic Web that it will evolve into tomorrow. Most of the Web's content today is designed to give timothy something to jackoff to, not for computer programs to manipulate meaningfully. Computers can adeptly parse Web pages for layout and routine processing--here a header, there a link to another page--but in general, computers have no reliable way to process the semantics: this is the home page of the Hartman and Strauss Physio Clinic, this link goes to Dr. Hartman's curriculum vitae.
The Semantic Web will bring structure to the meaningful content of Web pages, creating an environment where software agents roaming from page to page can readily carry out sophisticated tasks for users. Such an agent coming to the clinic's Web page will know not just that the page has keywords such as "treatment, medicine, physical, therapy" (as might be encoded today) but also that Dr. Hartman works at this clinic on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays and that the script takes a date range in yyyy-mm-dd format and returns appointment times. And it will "know" all this without needing artificial intelligence on the scale of 2001's Hal or Star Wars's C-3PO. Instead these semantics were encoded into the Web page when the clinic's office manager (who never took Comp Sci 101) massaged it into shape using off-the-shelf software for writing Semantic Web pages along with resources listed on the Physical Therapy Association's site.
In other news, GWB has shown is unbound arrogance again today at UN. Even now his war-cry is the barbaric: "you are either with us or against us" and did he show any conciliatory signs . No! It's the UN which has to "move on!".
This man's arrogance is unbelievable!
Vote out the idiot and his nazi neocon cronies - vote for Clark in 2004!
great, so we have to upgrade our CPU to do *the same thing*
It's like celebrating upgrading your bandwidth when all you did was maintain your spare capacity once you've downloaded the thousands of fake Microsoft Security Bulletins.
Do more with less not less with more.
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
Wasn't he tried for war crimes?
Are we talking, "all the pr0n since yesterday", or "all the pr0n with red-haired women"? :p
j/k
stuff |
Perhaps it's just me, but the graphics on the homepage of The Friend of a Friend (FOAF) project(linked to from the review), actually makes me wonder if these so called friends have other reasons for describing us and our webpages. ;)
$50 says Dave Winer is pissed off that he didn't get mentioned in this write-up...
Double that if I do a gleeful dance when it turns out that he is. Weeee!
'Thats they exact same thing a banana wrench monkey.'
Damn it.. I hate it when reviewers give away the ending.. :(
LOL MOD Parent up +5 FUNNY
Welcome to the new programming "flavor-of-the-month".
I just finished skimming the whole book and reading about half. My biggest complaint is there isn't much guidance as to where you should go and define your own vocabulary and where you should use an existing one. The only vocabulary discussed besides the RDF core is Dublin Core. To make things worse, most of the examples shows using a custom vocabulary that unnecessarily defines 'Author' and 'Title' instead of using Dublin Core's 'creator' and 'title'.
I like RDF alot, its really a great tool, but without some serious guidance and discipline when defining vocabularies its going to descend into babble and become pretty useless.
Does anyone know of a good resource for finding emerging standards for RDF vocabularies so we don't all go out and reinvent the wheel?
The rest of this comment is fluff. The subject line says it all.
I'm sure RDF has plenty to offer to the world of online porn. Porn afficianados will more efficiently scour their favorite sites to find the material pertaining to their specific fetishes. Porn merchants will more easily attract the customers who seek them by exactly specifying what they have to offer instead of spamming the search engines with likely keywords.
I can't wait!
I've been working in this area. First off the reviewer is wrong. There are very few production systems using RDF. In fact most of it right now is pure academic research. The commercial implementations of RDF graft on a whole bunch of things to make it useful. One critical flaw of the current thinking is URI is authorative and persistent. In other words, a URI uniquely identifies a domain and does not change. That is a falicy which does not exist in commercial sites. URI/URL's are rarely persistent or authorative. RuleML in my opinion is a much better approach to building a semantic web. As far as OWL goes. It is horribly broken and the commercial industry is moving towards other models of onotology. Most are actually going with a webservices model, rather than a strict ontology. There are numerous issues and problems which the current semantic doesn't address. For example the whole concept of binding is poorly addressed and is not flexibly. Many of the researchers believe RDF should be the object model, but companies are using schema, relaxNG and XMI. Semantic web holds a lot of promise if only they work out these critical issues.
who switched to democrat cause Bush wouldn't call him for advice lol you want a petty man like that as prez? what part of "you are either with us or against us" don't you understand loser? Bush merely speaks the truth and is so rough on those naughty terrorists sad huh?
a practical Reality Distortion Field? try e-mailing this guy -- he may be able to help you a bit more.
(see what a mac-addled brain turns Slashdot stories into on first glance?)
Mindy: "Well...desserts aren't always right." Homer: "But they're so sweet!"
Wasn't Shelly Powers the girl from Austin Powers?
Mod me down as offtopic, but without a SCO article for last couple of days, I am having withdrawal symptoms. Please post a SCO article!!!!
One tool not mentioned: the semantic web library for Swi-Prolog that provides a high level toolkit for dealing with RDF, Owl, etc. Since the hoped-for use of RDF is applications that make logical inferences, Prolog seems like a good language to use :-)
The Jena and Sesame packages are written in Java and also are very good tools.
The big problem is getting people to use RDF - this technology can only be useful if enough people use it (think FAX machines).
I believe that the earliest large scale adoption of Semantic Web technologies will really be on company LANs and be used for organizing company/.organizational information.
Think of shifting from information technology to knowledge management technology.
-Mark
TBL's opening example in the Sciam article makes me giggle, since up until recently I worked in healthcare IT. While everyone else is trying to move from EDI to XML, the current big Y2K-scale issue in the healthcare industry is moving *TO* EDI. A lot of stuff is still phone calls, paper, and resistance to change. By the time the healthcare industry is ready to implement RDF, we'll all have nanobots in our blood and won't need doctors anymore.
...and here I was thinking Veritechs were now becoming practical for everyday use.
I've read it as well, and largely agree with the review though I would say a little more strongly that if you are new to RDF this is an invaluable resource. There's lots of great information online, but not with this cohesive style and concise format.
this is getting old and so are you
blog
My company's intranet site acts like a portal (I know the term is overused), and it relies heavily on RDF files to gather data. Slashdot is one of the sites it gathers information from, and it makes it a very nice, uniform page.
...who after seeing the title of this article thought of a book by Steve Jobs ? :)
Was I the first one to think about the Zentradi and all the cool new toys that might become available if they realised that the RDF might be practicle?
"The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." ~Plato (427-347 BC)
If CT has no dick and no tongue, then how the fuck is good ol' Cowboy Neal going to get fucked? With fingers? Strap-on dildo's? Or just plain butt-plugs?
Heh. Why choose? Why not all three? Then fun will be had by all except the now sexless CT.
The real secret of RDF is that RDF Schema is one *example* of how frame languages, onotologies, and knowledge bases (logic programming) might be used in environments where message formats, business rules, and resource descriptions are constantly changing.
=googol=you are an idiot.
It seems like a lot of progress has been made since then, but personally I still don't see the point. If you buy into XML as the "lingua franca" of semantic data interchange, then great. I do too. But what exactly is RDF useful for? If we can agree on an XML schema for our data, we can exchange it directly without the need for yet another layer of abstraction on top of it.
The really hard part is agreeing on the schemas, and this has nothing to do with RDF. Having worked in one XML vocabulary standardization effort (Universal Business Language), I can only stress that the technical and political challenges of getting any group of individuals and companies to agree on any common data format are enormous. For example, it would be great if Amazon and B&N used the same schema for their book descriptions, but imagine trying to make this happen (particularly as they are likely to feel that the specificities of their formats represent some kind of competitive advantage).
So until proven wrong I continue to believe that RDF is nothing but smoke and mirrors. The easy stuff is done by XML right out of the box, and the hard stuff has nothing whatsoever to do with data structures and wire serialization formats.
Peer Pressure
/(...)/ == sarcasm
On our staggeringly democratic web, anyone can be a publisher, and as Meta tags have shown - not everyone has the truth in mind.
I find it odd to note that it is never discussed how RDF will be kept from rapidly degenerating into Meta-tag style abuse.
Will there be an authority that will verify content descriptors, or at least handle complaints of abuse?
I would honestly like someone to prove me wrong, to show me where the technology prevents, handles and/or reduces abuse. Because I'm genuinely excited about what is possible with a trustworthy intelligent network. However, I'm just not seeing it here.
Even normally trustworthy hosts tend to have some disingenuous information in their RSS feeds when they think it will benefit their business.
(Eg. altering post dates or posting phantom or questionable updates to get more hits from feed subscribers, broadly labelling their content to avoid being properly categorized to expand their exposure, etc)
So is it accounted for?
// "Can't clowns and pirates just -try- to get along?"
of this story I suspected it was going to be a book about the life and times of Steven P. Jobs.
because i have the exact same question.
That's not funn! My granfather died at Auschwitz!
I confess that I am still dipping my toes into RDF, but I think I know the answer to your specific objection : reification
Think about it : how does one deal with truths, half truths and lies in the real world? One internally assimilates various sources and ascribes trust levels to them. If Joe is known to be a liar, then most statements coming from him are suspect. RDF doesnt make that inference, but it does allow you to record the fact that the source of a particular statement is Joe, and not Mary, who you trust a lot more.
I assume that this is the reason for the reliability of Google. Its database not only records statements (webpages), but it also records who is making those statements and the ranking function probably associates a trust level to the source of the statements.
RDF is not an inference engine. But it does provide the infrastructure to build an inference engine upon.
There is no such thing as luck. Luck is nothing but an absence of bad luck.
I ran over the pages of Spinning the semantic web today - does anybody know if this book is worthwhile my time?
Thanks!
- PB
Or more to the point, How will ownership get in the way? For the masses, turning the web into a repository of all knowledge and distributing tools to digest it and do things with it would be great. But what ultimately drives progress is its ability to make money. What blocks progress is its negative impact on the people who are already getting most of the money.
Since the Internet came online we have seen a tremendous, mostly obstructionist reaction from the relatively small community that claims ownership of information. Although copyright conveys no actual ownership, the concepts of "stealing" and "pirating" information have become solidly entrenched. People who put information in front of the public are increasingly trying to control what happens to it. They feel they not only own the information itself, but are entitled to get paid whenever anyone benefits from it in any way.
I don't see this community of information controllers sitting still while other people develop new and wonderful uses for "their" data. What I do see is lawmakers giving them more and more control over types of progress that may infringe their rights, and to perpetuate those rights indefinitely. So when I read about the rosy future of RDF and all its benefits for mankind, I have to think, yeah, and we'll have jetpacks, undersea cities and lunar vacations by the year 2000.
so, two examples highlighting an order of magnitude more CPU power required.
Well done, you won't mind if I don't eat my words.
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
At my site which a combination blogger/yahoo groups/office pool central any user can make their own blogs and provide RSS feeds. In addition the users can build their own FOAF RDF files which can then be used to explore their network of connections. SVG plugin required.
I agree. That's not fun. (or funn, if you prefer, with the extra n in german)
There is nothing practical about RDF.
The syntax is horribly complex for what it does, which is basically assert relationships between pairs (think isa(tweety,bird), where 'isa' is the relationship). Also note that asserting relationships between pairs is NOT at all sufficient to model real world data (think update anomalies); which is why we have much better models, such as the relational model, and the prolog and LISP datastructures. (In fact, prolog comes with an assert statement)
With RDFS you can define restraints on relationships; for example that in the relationship is_married_to(M,F) the participants M and F should be of a different gender (just an example folks, visit Amsterdam!). Again, this is done in a horribly convoluted syntax, and it cannot model some very useful restraints.
Furthermore, the tools for RDF c.s. are not up to scratch. Buggy parsers, buggy GUIs, apps that are not under active development, memory footprints that are insane.
RDF is useful only for RSS, which, by-the-by, doesn't conform to the RDF/RDFS specs - precisely because of the tools.
For storing data in a meaningful way, even the simplest of databases (yes, mysql) is much better. If you want to have better constraints on stuff, and perhaps even do some nifty "inference engine" stuff, stick to prolog if you need that sort of thing, it will make life much easier, even though it's a scary language and not as hyped as XML. (Other options would be CLIPS/Jess, LISP/Scheme or some custom made magic).
I've worked with RDF and it plain sucks. No two ways about it. Just say no to RDF!
SCO employee? Check out the bounty
Most of the RDF tools are in Java, but some folks doing C# may be interested in Drive, and excellent RDF parser for C#.
The TAO of Topic Maps.
For a second there, I thought they had channelled Steve Jobs' reality distortion field.
"Use it for fun, or profit! Amaze your friends! Make women succumb to your power!"
Throw in some sea monkeys and a pair of x-ray specs, and you'd have my credit card number.
that explains it then
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
This is not a problem; it is a business opportunity. Seriously.
Just think about it: Google got around the problem of META tag abuse by skipping them and relying on others. It doe snot take much imagination to "page rank" RDF entries on a similar basis. The authority then is just the collection of users out there with publically available RDF entries.
Come to think of it; Google already has every part in place to actually do it now.