[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: RDF Interpretation of XML documents (was Re: [xml-d

• To: simonstl@s... (Simon St.Laurent)
• Subject: Re: RDF Interpretation of XML documents (was Re: [xml-d
• From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
• Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2002 12:57:50 -0400 (EDT)
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <r01050300-1015-C32EC535B45A11D69F470003937A08C2@[192.168.124.21]> from "Simon St.Laurent" at Aug 20, 2002 12:34:56 PM

Simon St.Laurent scripsit:

> > 3) Eschew mixed content.
> 
> Is this an absolute must for such RDF interpretation?

At the formal level, RDF defines no meaning for elements with mixed
content.

At the conceptual level, RDF throws away information about document order
(child elements and attributes are basically the same thing), and mixed
content makes little or no sense in that domain of interpretation.

> It really seems to highlight that RDF and XML are different planets.

They are.  But a) the standard serialization of RDF models is expressed
in XML, and b) most "data-oriented" XML can be processed by conformant
RDF processors with at most local tweaking.

-- 
John Cowan  jcowan@r...  www.reutershealth.com  www.ccil.org/~cowan
Assent may be registered by a signature, a handshake, or a click of a computer
mouse transmitted across the invisible ether of the Internet. Formality
is not a requisite; any sign, symbol or action, or even willful inaction,
as long as it is unequivocally referable to the promise, may create a contract.
       --_Specht v. Netscape_

• References:
  • Re: RDF Interpretation of XML documents (was Re: [xml-d
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XML Tokenizer - a free, simple open-source XML Parser
• Next by Date: Re: Namespace declaration versus attribute
• Previous by thread: Re: RDF Interpretation of XML documents (was Re: [xml-d
• Next by thread: Re: RDF Interpretation of XML documents (was Re: [xml-d
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread