Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Meta-somethingorother (was the semantic web mega-permathre
 Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote: > At 4:42 PM +0100 6/9/04, Bill de hÓra wrote: > > >> The problem with your position is that you're doing something along >> the lines of comparing Lisp to Sexprs and asking, what does Lisp buy >> me? You're not taking in account the code that needs to impute >> meaning into the Sexpr in the absence of a Lisp evaluator. This confuses me. LISP (LIst Processor) *is* the interpreter that interprets s-expressions (AFAIK). > > Let's run with that analogy for a minute. If I were claiming Lisp and > S-exprs were equivalent, you could show me some Lisp programs that > could not be written as S-exprs without also writing an S-expr > interpreter. Of course Lisp programs are always written as s-expressions (modulo some parser that parses something else into s-expressions). > I want to see the RDF programs that could not equally easily be > written with plain XML. "RDF program" I'm not sure how to interpret this. RDF is a *format* for interpreting triples as a graph (very basically). > So far I've only heard it claimed that these exist, but I haven't been > able to get anybody to produce one. In fact, the few cases I have > looked at deeply turned out to be based on plain XML and not RDF at > all! If this stuff is really practical, it shouldn't be that hard to > come up with an existence proof. > > I am quite sure that I can express *any* RDF as XML -- even if I didn't use RDF/XML, I could easily express any triple format using some type of XML wrapper. What am I missing? Jonathan 
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! 
Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||
