• To: 'Eric van der Vlist' <vdv@d...>
• Subject: RE: RDF Interpretation of XML documents (was Re: [xml-d ev] patterns vs. identifiers)
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 10:59:17 -0500
• Cc: xml-dev@l...

Too much cognitive overhead. :-)

... although the mixed content thing makes 
sense.  On the other hand, I suspect that a lot 
of content out there won't be RDF compatible.

len

-----Original Message-----
From: Eric van der Vlist [mailto:vdv@d...]

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"...

• Prev by Date: Namespace declaration versus attribute
• Next by Date: xml corpus
• Previous by thread: Namespace declaration versus attribute
• Next by thread: RE: RDF Interpretation of XML documents (was Re: [xml-d
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread