W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > April 2001

RE: Dispositions of Dave Beckett's comments

From: Ron Daniel <rdaniel@interwoven.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 15:53:08 -0700
To: "'Aaron Swartz'" <aswartz@swartzfam.com>, "'Dave Beckett'" <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>, "'RDF Interest'" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Cc: "'spec-comments'" <spec-comments@prismstandard.org>
Message-ID: <008601c0bbc7$b0aba9a0$e814000a@interwoven.com>
Aaron said:

> I understand this -- the issue is not that the RDF is bad, 
> but that generic
> RDF processors cannot be used as PRISM processors. In other 
> words, I can't
> take SiRPAC or Redland off-the-shelf and use it to manipulate 
> PRISM. This
> may not be a major issue, but it does bother me that you're 
> requiring the
> use of special tools to use PRISM and not being truly open RDF.

If this is the consensus of the RDF interest list I can
certainly take that new material back out. But please
consider:

1) PRISM is an application of RDF. RDF is a generic framework.
   PRISM has a particular purpose, and thus there is a
   surrounding context of assumptions and decisions. Just
   like an XML parser has to be supplemented in order to
   do the application-specific logic, RDF tools will have
   to be supplemented to do the PRISM-specific stuff.
   In my case, the RDF tool I have been using is RDFFilter,
   so dealing with order does not set off alarm bells for me.
   Its just extra PRISM-specific logic to track the order
   they came out of RDFFilter. That will not be perfectly
   accurate, but it sure looks like a 90/10 point to me.

2) PRISM applications are REQUIRED to produce legal RDF that
   can be handled by any fully-compliant RDF processor. Only
   PRISM processors would be required to preserve the order
   of statements. So, generic RDF software will read and write
   the descriptions just fine. They won't be aware of some
   higher level application-specific info. They may swap the
   order of some things. That is to be expected. They were not
   developed to be PRISM compliant.

Ron
Received on Monday, 2 April 2001 18:55:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:48 GMT