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

Re: adorning XML Schema for RDF extraction

From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 09:53:02 +0100
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010919094745.03fc3ec0@joy.songbird.com>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Cc: W3C RDF Interest Group <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Sando Hawke has been experimenting with something he calls "blindfold 
grammars", which has a slightly wider but related goal.

For some details, see: http://www.w3.org/2001/06/blindfold/grammar

Also, there has been some recent feedback on the RDF-comments mailing list 
about using different schema environments to validate RDF -- I'm not sure 
if they go as far as automated triple generation.

Finally, I've noted that it is often quite easy to define a "conventional" 
XML language to be RDF compatible;  e.g. some work I'm doing to represent 
email metadata in XML and RDF:
   http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-klyne-message-rfc822-xml-02.txt

#g
--

At 01:48 PM 9/18/01 -0700, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>I've just subscribed to the IG, so please pardon me if this is
>a FAQ.
>
>I've been looking around at the various papers about extracting RDF
>from XML [1][2], and was wondering what the current state of such
>work is.
>
>While these proposals look promising, I'd like to be able to adorn an
>XML Schema to explicitly indicate which elements can be used as
>statements; surely this shouldn't be too difficult? (disclaimer: I'm
>not a Schema expert).
>
>Has this particular approach been contemplated? I know there's been
>discussion in the past; is there ongoing work or discussion in this
>area?
>
>Cheers,
>
>
>1. http://www-db.stanford.edu/~melnik/rdf/fusion.html
>2. http://www.openhealth.org/RDF/rdf_Syntax_and_Names.htm
>
>--
>Mark Nottingham
>http://www.mnot.net/
>

------------
Graham Klyne
GK@NineByNine.org
Received on Wednesday, 19 September 2001 06:01:20 GMT

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