@rieyin I didn't mean to argue that there isn't value in understanding rdf and knowledge graphs more generally--there is! It gives me hope to hear you are continuing to help new practitioners and researchers understand these things.

I only would like to point out that a *teensy* bit more effort to make the vocabulary useful for people who are not using rdf native tooling, would go a long way for adoption...kinda like what happened with activitypub here in the fedi.

Thanks for the gut check, I don't want to be dismissive of other approaches, and ways of understanding.

@rieyin @ink @swib "why bother with JSON-LD if you don’t care about RDF? ". Because you satisfy two needs with one thing: 1) those who don't care about RDF and just want JSON (aka most web developers - and also backend devs in need of e.g. fast fulltext search engines) and 2) those who may find benefits in RDF. Or even both.
Reminds me on my #SWIB talk 2012 in behalf of @lobid : https://swib.org/swib12/slides/Christoph_SWIB12_117.pdf

@acka47 @ink In case, I have written an "extended transcript" or a short paper of my upcoming presentation, available here: https://doi.org/10.48620/92261 #LinkedData #swib25 #iiif #linkedart

@acka47 nice! I am definitely down to hear about what linkeddata looks like from the perspective of #sts and learn how that can inform the use of bibframe.

I think many people reject bibframe out of hand because, despite years of good work, not enough effort has been made to make it accessible to people who are working with data on the web.

@julsraemy