[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Services-based automation (WAS RE: Realistic proposals to the W3C?)
Martin Bryan wrote: "Think of your average HTML document. How much (semantic) meaning is there in any node label? In 99% of tags, none. Are Word documents (even those stored as XML objects) any better? Or an XML-encoded Star document? No. To apply meaning to such documents you have to associate a meaningful term with the node. There may be more than one relevant term to describe the meaning. Different communities (linguistic, cultural or commercial) use different terms to identify the same meaning. You therefore need a mechanism for assoication multiple terms to a single node. This is what Topic Maps do. (Unfortunately, despite many years of screaming on my part, Topic Maps fail to require you to record the meaning of the term!!)" Using the RDF 1.0 syntax http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax/ metadata is distinguished from HTML by use of a <rdf:Description about="">...</rdf:Description> block which may contain Dublin Core metadata properties (this is the classic example). Such an element can be embedded in the HTML header and is intended to distinguish between metadata and markup used for layout purposes. Like namespaces or not, this is an excellent practical example of how vocabularies are partitioned within a single document. It seems there is overlap between the capabilities of RDF and Topic Maps, which is one reason many people are hoping that the two efforts can be integrated. Jonathan Borden The Open Healthcare Group http://www.openhealth.org
|
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
|