Re: About computer-optimized RDF format.

>> As someone who does some data merger, I used to do it in XML via XSLT, and
>> now I just move things over to RDF after a process of "URI normalization" -
>> i.e. making sure we use the same URIs as keys. I'd like to hear about other
>> people's experiences here.
>
> [snip]
>
> It would be interesting to know more about the sorts of data and integration
> tasks you have and whether it has certain characteristics that make it well
> suited for this. If so, that would make a nice little decision tree.

one very interesting feature of RDF vs XML is the notion of unique identifier.
id/idred are missing from xml. so it is difficult to *add* new data
about a identified resource
during the data lifecycle.
and, considering RDFS and OWL, the "multiple inheritance" has become a
no brainer. in xml, you need very good skils to mimic that behaviour :
a tag has only one name (==one class). multi-characterization of the
same resource is required in most complex  multi-partners data
lifecycle.
the fact that you can enhance the model (==merge several modeling
statements coming from different models but talking about the same
data structure) is also invaluable during data lifecycle.