W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > November 2004

Re: Semantic Argument (Warning: Long Post)

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 16:14:20 +0000 (UTC)
To: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
Cc: Doug Schepers <doug@schepers.cc>, www-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0411241606391.16082@dhalsim.dreamhost.com>

On Sat, 13 Nov 2004, Danny Ayers wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 01:21:26 +0000 (UTC), Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
> > > 
> > > Let's let RDF and other ontological XML dialects do their job of 
> > > providing rich semantics
> > 
> > RDF, at least in its current state, has had basically zero uptake in 
> > the real world. RSS is the closest thing to a success that RDF has 
> > had, and no RSS viewers are implemented in terms of RSS. In fact, most 
> > RSS feeds aren't even well-formed XML. RSS has, in that sense, been as 
> > (un)successful as XHTML1.
> 
> I beg to differ. There is uptake of RDF (and OWL) in the real world.
> It's not huge, but is growing (the same could probably be said about SVG 
> and MathML).

I haven't seen that uptake. But I'll take your word for it.


> There are several RSS viewers implemented in terms of RDF. Several RSS 
> applications actually rely on the richness offered by RDF over plain-XML 
> RSS.

Well, that's encouraging.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Wednesday, 24 November 2004 16:14:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:42:49 UTC