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

Re: QNames in attributes yet?

From: Aaron Swartz <aswartz@upclink.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2001 01:18:08 -0500
Message-Id: <200109230621.f8N6Ll819755@theinfo.org>
Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org, www-rdf-comments@w3.org
To: Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com
On Thursday, September 20, 2001, at 01:48  AM, 
Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com wrote:

> Do you then consider the other changes in the revamped DTD to
> be less backwards compatible?

Well, yes. I don't believe we've added any serious new features 
like you're suggesting.

> One of the most frequent complaints I hear about RDF serializations
> (and often speak myself ;-) is the burdensome use of long URIs
> to define RDF and RDF Schema instances.

Perhaps you would benefit by using something like Notation3 
syntax to write out RDF documents, and then use a tool like CWM 
to convert them into RDF/XML or N-Triples. RDF/XML isn't a very 
good language for humans to write RDF in, IMO.

> What is the feeling of the RDF community about this, particularly
> those implementing systems?

Obviously, the working group is very open to feedback -- are 
there people out there who really want this feature? Are 
developers interested in implementing it?

I haven't heard much so far, but if there's a significant 
response, I will take that information back to the Working Group.

--
[ "Aaron Swartz" ; <mailto:me@aaronsw.com> ; <http://www.aaronsw.com/> ]
Received on Sunday, 23 September 2001 02:18:12 GMT

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