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

XML/RDF

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: XML/RDF
• From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
• Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2002 13:11:45 -0500

If people thought that XLink was an intrusive technology, I'm not sure
what they'll make of the RDF-friendly XML described at:

http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2002/10/30/rdf-friendly.html

Points 2, 3, 4, and 5 leave me utterly cold. I can't imagine telling XML
vocabulary developers to do those things while keeping a straight face.
Points 6 and 7, on container models and mixed content, seem to me to
reinforce a set of processing biases that fit poorly with markup
approaches in the first place.

At some point it seems that it makes a lot more sense for ordinary
mortals to work in XML and let geniuses write transformations if they
want to reuse the information in RDF processing.  Creating markup in a
straitjacket can be a lot of fun, but only if you're genuinely fond of
the straitjacket.

Fortunately, the W3C doesn't presently seem as excited about imposing
this style on new vocabularies as it's been about XLink.


-------------
Simon St.Laurent - SSL is my TLA
http://simonstl.com may be my URI
http://monasticxml.org may be my ascetic URI
urn:oid:1.3.6.1.4.1.6320 is another possibility altogether

• Prev by Date: Re: Character Entities: An XML Core WG View
• Next by Date: RE: XML/RDF
• Previous by thread: RE: What is XML For? Again!!
• Next by thread: RE: XML/RDF
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread