W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > March 2006

Re: G(RDDL)

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2006 09:54:02 -0600
To: Misha Wolf <Misha.Wolf@reuters.com>
Cc: www-tag@w3.org, public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org, newsml-2@yahoogroups.com
Message-Id: <1141919642.26363.1515.camel@dirk.w3.org>

On Thu, 2006-03-09 at 15:22 +0000, Misha Wolf wrote:
> In seeking to formulate a proposal to the NewsML 2 Architecture WP 
> for how we should make use of RDDL and GRDDL, I am struck by the 
> different approaches taken by these two specs to linking to 
> resources.  Presumably, there is no reason why not to use the RDDL 
> approach to link to GRDDL transforms (instead of the approach 
> proposed in the GRDDL spec).

The approaches overlap; I've written RDDL documents that
are also GRDDL documents. The GRDDL profile itself used
to use RDDL; I found it hard to maintain, so I switched
to Embedded RDF; perhaps I should go back in CVS-time,
grab that RDDL example, and make an example of it...
perhaps in the GRDDL test suite, perhaps elsewhere.

Meanwhile, I'm interested to know... what differences
looked important to you?

>   If we were to do this, we would wish 
> to use some agreed natures/purposes.  Is anyone interested in 
> defining these?

I am, inasmuch as RDDL natures/purposes are just RDF properties.

p.s. I'm replying to all 3 lists, including newsml-2@yahoogroups.com ,
though the last few times I copied that list, I got a notice that
I'm not authorized to post there.

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Thursday, 9 March 2006 15:54:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:15:01 GMT