• To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Subject: RE: RDF Interpretation of XML documents (was Re: patterns vs. identifiers)
• From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...>
• Date: 20 Aug 2002 17:39:35 +0200
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <2C61CCE8A870D211A523080009B94E430752B82A@HQ5>
• References: <2C61CCE8A870D211A523080009B94E430752B82A@HQ5>

On Tue, 2002-08-20 at 17:04, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
> How does one write a document in RDF friendly ways?

It's up to you :-)

You can write it as a fully compatible and classical RDF document
meeting the syntax of the RDF syntax rec or only make sure that it is
easily transformable into such a document with your favorite toolbox...
Between these two extreme solutions there are many things to explore,
following John Cowan when he says: "Unless it contains mixed content,
almost any reasonable XML document has an RDF interpretation"...

Eric
-- 
Rendez-vous à Paris.
                          http://www.technoforum.fr/integ2002/index.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric van der Vlist       http://xmlfr.org            http://dyomedea.com
(W3C) XML Schema ISBN:0-596-00252-1 http://oreilly.com/catalog/xmlschema
------------------------------------------------------------------------

• References:
  • RE: RDF Interpretation of XML documents (was Re: patterns vs. identifiers)
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>

• Prev by Date: Re: patterns vs. identifiers
• Next by Date: Re: the infoset is two infosets (or even three?) [was:
• Previous by thread: RE: RDF Interpretation of XML documents (was Re: patterns vs. identifiers)
• Next by thread: Re: RDF Interpretation of XML documents (was Re: [xml-d
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread