[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: XSchema Question 1: RDF
At 10:02 PM 6/1/98 UT, Simon St.Laurent wrote: >We need to get the RDF discussion moving again so we can move on to specific >syntax. RDF is painfully simple, conceptually. And Lisa is correct in saying that the syntax is (IMHO unnecessarily) kinda ugly; I think there are good reasons to expect improvement. But it is easy to tell if something can easily be made into RDF. Here's the test: if what you are building can be expressed as a bunch of 3-tuples (object, propertyname, propertyvalue) then it's RDF-able. Otherwise it's not. E.g. (document, rootType, HTML) (elementType IMG, takesAttribute, SRC) (attribute SRC, valueType, URI) (attribute BORDER, defaultValue, "1") (entity copy, value, "©") (entity xml-spec, systemID, "http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml") are all easily RDF-able. I think the only thing in DTD's that are not trivially RDF-able are content models. They *are* RDF-able, but you have to use some of the "Seq" machinery, which I find awkward. In fact *every* attempt so far (the old DSD stuff, XML-Data, etc) to express content models in XML has come up verbose and unreadable compared to good ol' 8879 DTD notation. I think there's a better way, and want to see what xml-dev can come up with. -Tim xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i... Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; (un)subscribe xml-dev To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; subscribe xml-dev-digest List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)
|
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
|