I can't help but think that part of your problem is that you're using
RDF/XML, which definitely makes it harder to understand and visualize the
data model.

It might help if you switched to an RDF native serialization, like Turtle,
which definitely helps with regards to "seeing" RDF.

On Nov 4, 2013 6:29 AM, "Ross Singer" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> And yet for the last 50 years they've been creating MARC?
> For the last 20, they've been making EAD, TEI, etc?
> As with any of these, there is an expectation that end users will not be
> hand rolling machine readable serializations, but inputting into
> interfaces.
> That is not to say there aren't headaches with RDF (there is no assumption
> of order of triples, for example), but associating properties with entity
> in which they actually belong, I would argue, is its real strength.
> -Ross.
> On Nov 3, 2013 10:30 PM, "Eric Lease Morgan" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> On Nov 3, 2013, at 6:07 PM, Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> > And it's not very hard given the right mindset -- its just a fully
>> expanded
>> > relational database, where the identifiers are URIs.  Yes, it's not 1st
>> > year computer science, but it is 2nd or 3rd year rather than post
>> graduate.
>> Okay, granted, but how many people do we know who can draw an entity
>> relationship diagram? In other words, how many people can represent
>> knowledge as a relational database? Very few people in Library Land are
>> able to get past flat files, let alone relational databases. Yet we are
>> hoping to build the Semantic Web where everybody can contribute. I think
>> this is a challenge.
>> Donít get me wrong. I think this is a good thing to give a whirl, but I
>> think it is hard.
>> ó
>> ELM