W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > October to December 2003

Re: [closed] xmlsch-12 capricious syntax

From: C. M. Sperberg-McQueen <cmsmcq@acm.org>
Date: 03 Oct 2003 22:24:18 +0200
To: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
Cc: Butler@bristol.ac.uk, Mark@bristol.ac.uk, W3C XML Schema IG <w3c-xml-schema-ig@w3.org>, www-rdf-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <1065212657.5824.491.camel@michael.hit.uib.no>

Colleagues,

thank you for your response to our comment.  A full account
of our formal responses to your responses is attached to
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003OctDec/0011.html
For the sake of those who are trying to track this particular issue
using the email archives, our response on this topic is given 
below.

-C. M. Sperberg-McQueen
 for the XML Schema WG

On Tue, 2003-04-29 at 21:06, Dave Beckett wrote:
> Dear Colleagues
> 
> The RDF Core WG has considered your last call comment captured in
> 
>    http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#xmlsch-12
> 
> raised in (XML Schema)
>   section "4.5. On the relation between RDF and off-the-shelf XML tools (policy, substantive)"
>   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0489.html
> 
> and (Butler)
>   http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0531.html
> 
> and decided
> 
>    http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2003Apr/0361.html
> 
> to postpone it.
> 
> 
> The main points we felt you raised in this comment are:
> 
> 1)  RDF/XML
>    - doesn't match the RDF graph model well
>    - many ways to write things (elements, attributes, attribute values , ...)
>    - cannot write a W3C XML Schema, Relax NG schema, XML 1.0 DTD
>    - "not convienient" to use XSLT, use XQuery, other XML tools
> 
> We know and could give you more problems.  However we felt we
> couldn't fix it all due to the charter constraint:
>   [[The RDF Core WG is neither chartered to develop a new RDF syntax, ...]]
>   -- http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCoreWGCharter
> 
> Although we note, most of the above XML technologies mentioned above
> are successfully used with RDF/XML.
> 
> So we propose to postpone dealing with this in this WG, recording
> your comments for any future work.
> 
> 
> 2)  RDF and XML need not be on different paths
>    - models, QLs, APIs, editors, tools
>    - this cleft is not required
> 
> We encourage work to help integrate better but recognise this is
> heading into larger web architecture issues.
> 
> 
> 3) Propose that the XML serialization were modified to capture more
>    of the regularity of the RDF data model, offer help.
> 
> The WG notes your offer of help and has asked the semantic web
> coordination group to carry it forward.
> 
> 
> We will add this issue to the RDFCore postponed issues list at:
> 
>    http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-validating-embedded-rdf
> 
> Please reply to this email, copying www-rdf-comments@w3.org indicating
> whether this decision is acceptable.

The WG did not approve a formal response to this disposition,
because owing to an error on my part we did not have your
response in front of us; my apologies.  We look forward to
the work you project for the future on RDF syntax.
Received on Friday, 3 October 2003 16:25:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:32 GMT