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

Re: DAML +OIL versus XML

• To: "Mohamed Fayez" <mfayez@m...>, <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: DAML +OIL versus XML
• From: "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@o...>
• Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 17:47:30 -0400
• References: <sec40827.063@m...>

"Mohamed Fayez" <mfayez@m...> wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> Can "DAML +OIL" replace "XML"?
>

No.

XML is essentially a set of rules which constrain the legal characters which
might form a UNICODE string i.e. XML itself is entirely about syntax. XML
Schema datatypes layer a set of interpretations about how snippets of such
strings might be interpreted as numbers, dates etc.

DAML+OIL (now OWL) is a _language_ which describes individuals and classes
and certain logical relationships among individuals and classes. The
DAML+OIL and OWL languages are encoded in XML and systems that understand
DAML+OIL and/or OWL can transmit such class descriptions between themselves
using the XML encoding.

Jonathan

• References:
  • DAML +OIL versus XML
    • From: "Mohamed Fayez" <mfayez@m...>

• Prev by Date: RE: key constraint question
• Next by Date: Re: Why XML?
• Previous by thread: Re: DAML +OIL versus XML
• Next by thread: Re: DAML +OIL versus XML
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread