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

RE: XML/RDF

• To: 'Bob DuCharme' <bobdc@s...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: XML/RDF
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2002 08:24:06 -0600

And given that RDDL could have RDF and not 
XLink in it, RDF is not something that can be ignored 
forever. To answer Mike's question, it appears 
one will have to cope with it in some contexts.

"4. namespaceDocument-8
    1. Action TB 2002/09/24: Revise the RDDL
       document to use RDF rather than XLink. Goal
       of publication as W3C Note."

from the TAG minutes.  Anyway, their replies may 
have been designed to open a debate on the immediate 
use of RDF.

Actually, the bigger issue is dependency among 
specifications and how much this is a choice 
of the implementors and how much of it is normative 
or architectural.  I am a bit surprised that TimBL 
resisted MIME types when discussing fragmentIDs. 
It has been a fundamental of hyperlinking for as 
long as I can remember that the notation processor 
of the target defined the semantic of what is 
basically an internal address type.  We seem to be 
patching around faux abstractions.

len


From: Bob DuCharme [mailto:bobdc@s...]

At 11/4/02 03:30 PM, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
>I remember a thread on this list in which
>someone said it was easy to make an XML
>document "RDF friendly" and I asked how.
>John replied with a concise answer and no
>one seemed to object.

That's what's so funny about this current thread--John's reply to you 
(http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/200208/msg01292.html) was precisely 
what inspired the article (and obviously, its title), and the article was 
essentially a padded version of that reply, with more examples and 
explanation and another guideline or two based on further reflection added. 
Simon even responded to that original set of guidelines 
(http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/200208/msg01293.html), but only had 
a problem with the "Eschew mixed content" one at the time.

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