W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > October to December 2001

RDF Issue rdfms-validating-embedded-rdf

From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 16:20:09 +0000
Message-ID: <3BEFF6B9.1040609@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
To: lee.jonas@cakehouse.co.uk
CC: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
Lee,

In

   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2001Apr/0374.html

you raised an issue with the RDF Model and Syntax spec which was recorded in

   http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-validating-embedded-rdf

as

  Summary: RDF has an "open grammar, which is harder to validate simply
  (and nigh on impossible to do properly with DTDs). - Syntax validation
  within the context of RDF embedded in other XML grammars would be
  easier if the RDF syntax were only of the 'Fixed-Schema' variety, see
  [http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2001Apr/0346.html ].
  Currently, the propertyElt construct, and abbreviated forms of RDF are
  of the 'Schema-follows-data' variety.

On 9th November 2001, as recorded in

   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Nov/0294.html

the RDFCore WG resolved

   The WG resolves to postpone rdfms-validating-embedded-rdf for
   later consideration on the grounds that it is out of scope of
   its current charter to change the current RDF/XML syntax to the
   extent necessary to address it.

Hopefully a future WG with a more relaxed charter will be empowered to make more 
radical changes to the RDF syntax.

Please reply to this message, copying www-rdf-comments@w3.org indicating whether 
this is an acceptable decision.

Brian McBride
RDFCore co-chair
Received on Monday, 12 November 2001 11:20:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:29 GMT