• To: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: patterns vs. identifiers
• From: "Emmanuil Batsis (Manos)" <mbatsis@h...>
• Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2002 16:18:51 +0300
• References: <r01050300-1015-76C297A2B50811D69F470003937A08C2@[192.168.124.21]>
• User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.1b) Gecko/20020721

Simon St.Laurent wrote:

>RDF and XML are a poor fit in general, but I don't think it's remotely
>possible to claim that RDF-think is as accessible as XML-think to most
>people.
>

Agreed, but RDF is much more easy to read and visualize than most think, 
which is a bad thing. RDF is not bound to any of it's formal or unformal 
forms, including the XML serialization and that makes RDFers have a 
different view for their data than XMLers have for their own. XML is 
(about) markup, RDF is not.


Regards,

Manos

• References:
  • RE: patterns vs. identifiers
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: RE: RDF Interpretation of XML documents (was Re: [xml-d
• Next by Date: Re: XHTML 2.0 and the death of XLink and XPointer?
• Previous by thread: RE: patterns vs. identifiers
• Next by thread: RE: patterns vs. identifiers
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread