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: > >>> Why not? What does the RDF buy you here? >> >> >> Much the same thing a database would, or a program would. Structured >> relations and uniform evaluation. > > You're going to need to be more specific. If you want something specific, read the RDF Model Theory. > I don't see that we don't have > these things with plain XML. With plain XML you have parsing and entity expansion. With XML+Namespaces you have QName macro processing on top of that. What XML pixie dust did I miss - self descriptive markup? > 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. No, I would show you the rules for Lisp evaluation. The idea would be that'd you appreciate the difference between a syntax tree (inscription) and a language (description) and we could get back to talking about a lack of interesting applications. Whether anyone ever wrote a Lisp program is irrelevant. Please remember that I don't disagree with your recent thinking re semantic web hype, just that the position you're currently arguing from has no merit. > I want to see the RDF programs that could not equally easily be written > with plain XML. 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. What I said above - that's irrelevant. You can interpret this as evasive - it's not - there's no way I'm contributing further confusion to this already deeply confused and wolly-headed permathread. I suggest making an informed decison - read the RDF or OWL Model Theory and decide for yourself whether XML+Namespaces+HTTP cover it off - if you come back and say yes, then we'll have something to talk about.If you want to talk seperately about Semantic web hype the lack of cool Semantic web apps that's fine, but we'll probably just end up agreeing. But please stop conflating the Semantic Web with RDF and XML with a data model. Expressive power and running code are separate issues and conflating them for the sake of argument isn't useful. cheers Bill 
|
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
|
|||||||||
