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

Re: Formation of RDF terms

From: Jonathan Borden <jborden@mediaone.net>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 18:17:15 -0500
Message-ID: <07ca01c08bdb$f40fd1b0$0a2e249b@nemc.org>
To: "Graham Klyne" <GK@NineByNine.org>
Cc: "Dave Beckett" <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>, "RDF Interest" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Graham Klyne wrote:
> Jonathan,
>
> I pretty much agree with most of your response.
>
> Maybe where we differ is that I would like to see the model straightened
> out, or clarified, THEN sort out the syntactical oddities with reference
to
> a stable, well-understood model.

I don't see why these need to be done in serial fashion. I'm also not sure
what so pressingly needs to be straightened out in the model.

>
> To me, the model isn't just a topic of theoretical discussion:  it has
> intrinsic utility.  The syntax is needed for exchanging model data, for
> embedding model data in XML documents and (in some cases) for providing an
> interpretation of existing XML documents in terms of model
> constructs.  (Not using the terms "model" and "interpretation" here in a
> logician's sense.)

I think it has been conclusively demonstrated that the syntax is
insufficient for exchanging model data -- unless I'm missing something but
unless there is a way to serialize every URI as a qname, and back again, how
are model's to communicate? (since rdf:Statement serializes only a reified
statement, not the statement itself)

But let's assume that a part of the RDF community is solely interested in
the RDF Model and the purpose of the syntax is solely to exchange data
between models ... this stands the rest of the community which is concerned
with either embedding RDF into XML documents, or interpreting XML documents
as RDF.

Let me throw this out: Compare and contrast the RDF Syntax vs. the XLink
syntax as a means to exchange models between applications.

hint: for this specific purpose XLink, which deals solely the URIs not
qname<->URI, is a perfectly good syntax, XLink similarly allows embedding of
RDF triples within XML documents. What XLink does not help with is the RDF
interpretation of 'existing' XML documents.

-Jonathan
Received on Wednesday, 31 January 2001 18:31:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:47 GMT