Tim Bray: SPARQL is an answer to the question âWhat if I want to do SQL-like querying when I know perfectly well that everybody will be using their own incompatible database schema?â Iâve been a SemWeb skeptic [cut]. Hey, isnât Guhaâs Alpiri project more or less that back-end? And isnât Guha working at Google now?
http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/
Randy: Every time I see a SemWeb blog entry, I become more and more convinced that RDF is not worth the effort. Not because the ideas aren't great, but because the implementations are always half-baked. SPARQL is a great idea. The problem SPARQL has been a working draft for a year. I'm simply tired of these persistent half-baked working draft projects. Take a look at FOAF, it's been a working draft for 5 years. The RDF people don't seem to understand that half-baked specs end up on the cutting floor.
In what respect are mature implementations like those of Redland and Jena half-baked? Or for that matter newer implementations like Oracle's?
Randy
I also pointed out that most key specs weren't half-baked but either Recommendation status and/or had been usable for a fair amount of time. SPARQL may still be a Working Draft, but is at last call. FOAF is experimental, but there have been recent plans to change that status (primarily for social reasons, not technical).
Sorry, my mistake, I meant implementations of RDF as in SPARQL and FOAF and you read implementations as in Redland and Jena. I shoulda been more clear.
Randy
But consider your point duly noted - I have some truly half-baked vocabularies myself ;-)