Re: RDF being phased out?

Hey Axel,

I guess at the very least I just want it as it is!

Personally, I don't have any issues with the current RDF API at all - once mastered it works brilliantly - period. I think you've done a great 
job on it.  Heck we can run and display a regex filter over a 100,000 child XUL tree built from a wrapped JS DS in about half a second! You'll 
get no complaints here.

 From an API point of view, we've abstracted all the RDF API stuff anyway into our own generic Object API that hides all the RDF 
resources/literals/arcs etc and tracks which DS an assertion exists in. Eg:

var res1 = new Resource( STRINGURI_1 );
var res2 = new Resource( STRINGURI_2 );
var attr = res1.createAttribute( STRINGURI_3 )
attr.value = "Something";
res2.appendAttribute( attr );
[or]
attr.setLiteral( XMLSChemaTypeObject, Language ) // ANYURI is assumed to be an RDFResource


So we're already pretty abstracted from any potential RDF API changes.  My only longterm request would be xml:base and schema.


For the record - we have just had our _entire_ application borked because Mozilla decided to drop native SOAP support in 1.9, I'd much rather 
have a slightly broken and eclectic API than none at all.  I've just wasted 5 weeks of my life writing an entire SOAP API for all our stuff - I 
don't fancy doing that to get back RDF support as well.  Give me some bust XUL templates any day!


Just wanted to say, if nothing else - I'm feeling the RDF love.


N


Axel Hecht wrote:
> neil.stansbury () redbacksystems ! com wrote:
>> Axel Hecht wrote:
>>  > It depends. There are various different usages for RDF. Templates 
>> would
>>> be one, the docs for the new stuff for that are on MDC. Then the 
>>> stuff that mailnews does wrt to RDF in Addressbook and friends, the 
>>> rip out of that is part of the tb 3 design plan.
>>>
>>> Basically, RDF is phased out, but still used all over, so we're 
>>> gradually moving over to not using it. That isn't really an overall 
>>> plan, but more of an agenda, that's happening at the pace of the 
>>> particular code pieces.
>>>
>>> Axel
>>
>> I have to say personally I think this is nothing short of a travesty.
>>
>> Although eclectic, RDF is a superb tool for many data apps and 
>> achieves things that JSON and SQL will never be able to.
>>
>> 1. Is there a definitive time scale when we'll lose RDF support in 
>> Mozilla - specifically XULRUnner?
> 
> No, at least I haven't heard of one.
> 
>> 2. Does anyone know of any other Open Source RDF impl that might be 
>> able to replace the existing XPCOM one?
> 
> RDF impl is the least thing. A savvy API? Played with that on 
> http://hg.mozilla.org/users/axel_mozilla.com/index.cgi/rdf2/file/tip. 
> The backend? Didn't mind too much, and it really makes sense to tune it 
> to the API. An RDF/XML parsing/serialization framework? Turtle? 
> Ntriples? Yet another thing.
> 
> And of course, should the templates you're used to work on that engine? 
> Or at least migrate nicely?
> 
> What I'm trying to say, RDF is an almost as overloaded term as Mozilla 
> is, so you should specify what you really want.
> 
> Axel