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

RE: The perils of P18S (was Re: Why RDF is hard )

• To: "Danny Ayers" <danny666@v...>
• Subject: RE: The perils of P18S (was Re: Why RDF is hard )
• From: roger.day@g...
• Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002 10:43:47 +0000
• Cc: donpark@d..., xml-dev@l...

the only app I've seen using RDF is Mozilla, but I lead a sheltered life. Can
you cite me some others, please?

At 19/11/2002 10:27:07, "Danny Ayers" <danny666@v...> wrote:
#  I have yet to see an XML application that couldn't be done without XML, so
#  that argument isn't particularly strong. The point is that in the same way a
#  lot of applications are considerably easier to implement using XML, quite a
#  few applications are considerably easier with RDF, and such practical
#  applications are now popping up all over the place.

Roger

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: The perils of P18S (was Re: Why RDF is hard )
    • From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@f...>
  • RE: The perils of P18S (was Re: Why RDF is hard )
    • From: "Danny Ayers" <danny666@v...>
  • Re: The perils of P18S (was Re: Why RDF is
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>

• Prev by Date: RE: The perils of P18S (was Re: Why RDF is hard )
• Next by Date: Re: What are the arguments *for* XHTML 2.0?
• Previous by thread: Re: OT - Re: The perils of P18S (was Re: Why RDF is hard )
• Next by thread: Re: The perils of P18S (was Re: Why RDF is
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread