Hello, I’m a new member of your community and became fascinated by this topic.
@Alex_QWxleA’s answer, back on June 20th really attracted my attention. I also noticed that the discussion goes in a different direction than the one I would have hoped, so here’s me reviving some of the old convos. This is all in good faith, as a humble member of your community as I am thankful for giving me Logseq.
Maybe some big picture notes on sharing structured graphs, where it could be useful and its current pitfalls with Logseq’s current seralisations:
Although, I doubt sharing structured graphs becoming even remotely mainstream in the foreseeable future. As in, would they be adopted at the level of current social networks? While that would be awesome by the way, it just doesn’t feel like humanity can handle such a big task at the moment. The only thing that might push some communities to take position against this recent (as of Nov 1, 2022) question of how to tap into the wisdom of the crowd, as rapidly as possible. Then, I wonder, what can Logseq’s role be, in that. And frankly, it seems to big of a battle to position Logseq as a social networking platform, as some of the examples mentioned here, indicate.
Those solutions won’t scale, and I mean functional scaling in this case. No particular vocabulary, grammar, or model is governing those properties, etc., which means that there’s no gurantee that a meaningful message sent from a graph to another can easily be misinterpreted. If Logseq does want to do what @Alex_QWxleA is saying here, you may want to start looking into thinking of a neat way of mapping each Logseq block to an RDF resource description. Semantic Web was a mouvement that took a while to mature but the formalisms they have come up with by now, seem colossal, and they are being adopted by the elite in the enterprise world as well.
SKOS can be a good first example I think. It’s one of the simplest, yet very useful ontologies that have been developed. Essentially, it provides a very simple yet powerful language for organising concepts, by terms used to label them or taxonomies used to categorise them. One of the direct applications of this is a person’s ability to easily document their view on existing concepts for instance. Take Wikipedia as an example. Wikipedia editors aren’t supposed to reflect their personal views in encyclopedia articles. However, when a mere mortal knowledge artist is publishing a personal graph, well, they may want to refer to concepts that are already nicely defined in Wikipedia in a much more native way than it is possible today, and then tell their story, whatever it maybe about those concepts.
Any information system has master, reference, transactional, analytical, and operational data, correct? More or less. Well, Logseq can be the platform that is used to create transactions (each block being a transaction), where the master and reference data used to document those transactions may come more naturally for the shared resources on the Web via URLs, which then links the power of Logseq, which is in its ability to create structured content to the power of Semantic Web, that has been building up for years and there are enough decent implementations out there, to start considering its usage.
Sorry for the long message. I hope you’ll find the time to read it.
And BTW, you see how I said Logseq is responsible for creating those transactions, well, then social networks such as those that implement an open protocol like ActivityPub, well can be used to broadcast those transactions using RSS, another standard that is nicely linked to Semantic Web standards.