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

Re: a new way of thinking about RDF and RDF Schema

From: Sergey Melnik <melnik@db.stanford.edu>
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 16:47:00 -0700
Message-ID: <3BD4AFF4.A87601AD@db.stanford.edu>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
CC: bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com, www-rdf-interest@w3.org, simeon@research.bell-labs.com
"Peter F. Patel-Schneider" wrote:
> 
> From: Sergey Melnik <melnik@db.stanford.edu>
> Subject: Re: a new way of thinking about RDF and RDF Schema
> Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 15:43:59 -0700
> 
> > Peter,
> >
> > are you familiar with
> >
> > http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Syntax
> 
> Yes, I had seen that.
> >
> > and
> >
> > http://www-db.stanford.edu/~melnik/rdf/syntax.html
> > http://www-db.stanford.edu/~melnik/rdf/fusion.html ?
> 
> I hadn't seen these before.  I have seen a proposal by Stephan Decker
> (sp?).
> 
> > The idea of interpreting arbitrary XML documents semantically is at
> > least as old as RDF exists, I think. Unfortunately, quoting Brian on
> > this, "there ain't no free lunch". Assigning "meaning" to random XML
> > will often produce conterintuitive interpretations, unless the author of
> > the document cooperates and uses XML markup judiciously. The above links
> > suggest some ways of "adorning" XML documents (even as non-intrusively
> > as by simple DTD modifications) so that the corresponding documents have
> > well-defined RDF mappings. A reference implementation exists since 1999.
> >
> > Sergey
> 
> Ahh.  But suppose that you wanted to assign (RDF-ish) meaning to every XML
> document?  I haven't seen any schems that can do so.
> 
> peter

The above suggestion does assign meaning to any well-formed XML
document. As explained in "syntax.html", by default every XML tag
encountered during processing is considered to be a property name.

Sergey
Received on Monday, 22 October 2001 19:33:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:52 GMT