[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: patterns vs. identifiers
Bill de hÓra writes. > LOL. For the nth time: RDF is not XML. So I've heard. I guess you haven't noticed that I'm complaining about the RDF model. > > RDF and XML are a poor fit in general, but I don't think it's > > remotely possible to claim that RDF-think is as accessible as > > XML-think to most people. > > More FUD. Whenever I've shown people n-triples and visuals of RDF > graphs, they 'got it' very quickly. I show them the XML for that RDF, > programmers and people alike (interesting distinction) run away > screaming. Much the same to be said for UML and XMI. I'm afraid your FUD is my reality. Ugly serializations are just one small part of the problem. How much UML can people deal with at any given time - one they have to cross-reference all the pretty pictures? The RDF model is elegant and powerful. That doesn't mean that it's appropriate for every project, nor does it mean that it's a good model for how people like to work with information. RDF and URIs are great stuff - kept in their communities of people who like to think that way. Unfortunately, they're downright toxic when set loose on communities who don't think that way. Namespaces qualifies as a toxic spill from that world into the pattern-oriented world of embedded XML markup. ------------- 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
|
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
|