- From: A. Soroka <ajs6f@virginia.edu>
- Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2016 15:54:04 -0400
- To: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
- Cc: Martynas Jusevičius <martynas@graphity.org>, Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>, Andy Seaborne <andy@seaborne.org>, Fabien.Gandon@inria.fr
Jena offers both a machine-efficient streamable "flat" form and a more human-oriented "XML-ish" form: https://jena.apache.org/documentation/io/rdfxml_howto.html#rdfxml-rdfxml-abbrev https://jena.apache.org/documentation/io/rdf-output.html#rdfxml The fact that such a choice is made available speaks to the mismatch between RDF and XML. I add myself to the list of tired but stalwart people who spend too much time explaining that bnodes are not the secret way to recreate hierarchical context, ordered collections are only one of many possible choices for data modeling, etc. --- A. Soroka The University of Virginia Library > On Jun 9, 2016, at 3:29 PM, David Booth <david@dbooth.org> wrote: > >> Sure, the spec could have been better with fewer variations, but if you don't do nesting and keep descriptions "flat", the output is perfectly predictable. That is the default Jena output and we have been transforming it for years. > > Then you are using a particular, restricted dialect of RDF/XML that happens to be produced by Jena -- not RDF/XML in general. > > David Booth
Received on Thursday, 9 June 2016 19:54:54 UTC