- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 08:38:06 -0600
- To: Danny Ayers <danny666@virgilio.it>
- Cc: Garret Wilson <garret@globalmentor.com>, Libby Miller <Libby.Miller@bristol.ac.uk>, www-rdf-calendar@w3.org
Picking up some fairly old threads... On Fri, 2003-12-19 at 06:05, Danny Ayers wrote: > So DTD & XSD don't sound too promising..! I've seen this stuff talked about > so many times, but I think this is the first time I've read what happens if > you actually try it. > > Anyhow, I've no personal experience, but I believe RelaxNG allows a lot of > flexibility not found in XSD - might that be an option? I think this is probably worth doing, and that RelaxNG and XSD are both feasible. Yes, it limits expressiveness and extensibility, but keep in mind that the mapping we've defined between .rdf and .ics isn't all that extensible. We sorta support x- properties, but that's about it. The rdf2ical.py tool could be split in two: (1) a filter to grab just the .ics-relevant properties from an RDF knowledge base and format the results in the syntactic profile, and (2) a syntactic converter that only groks the profile. I wonder if http://kanzaki.com/parts/rdf2ical.xsl is pretty much (2). Does it have a full RDF parser? No, it seems to expect a limited syntax. I'm sure (1) would be a pretty straightforward cwm filter. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Tuesday, 27 January 2004 20:58:25 UTC