W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > March 2000

RE: The RDF model *is* part of the problem

From: Mark Birbeck <Mark.Birbeck@iedigital.net>
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 09:05:46 -0000
Message-ID: <A26F84C9D8EDD111A102006097C4CD0D0E9323@SOHOS002>
To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org, xml-dev@xml.org
Stefan Decker wrote:
> Mark,
> 
> if i look at your example:
>
> >   [my object-as-XML sample]
> 
> all i need to make a valid RDF-document out of it is to add namespace 
> declarations:
> 
> <?xml version='1.0' encoding='ISO-8859-1'?>
> 
> <rdf:RDF
>   xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
>   xmlns= "http://www.rdfschema.org/mynamespace.rdf#">
> 
> 
> at the beginning
> 
> and
> 
> </rdf:RDF>
> 
> at the end, and to replace ID with rdf:ID. Thats it.
> 
> [Stefan's RDF version of same object]
> 
> Maybe the syntax isn't that bad....

That's right. IMO, the whole point of the 'abbreviated forms' that have
been moaned about recently is so that almost any *existing* XML file can
'become' RDF. As it happens you don't even need the RDF tag or the ID
attribute - they can be abbreviated too so you could have left my XML
alone and just said 'it is now RDF'.

Best regards,

Mark Birbeck
x-port.net
Received on Wednesday, 1 March 2000 04:05:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:42 GMT