W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > November 2002

Re: RDF, RDFS and DAML+OIL benifits over XML

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 14:13:09 -0500 (EST)
To: Pedro Assis in Oporto <passis@dee.isep.ipp.pt>
cc: <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0211061406020.18473-100000@tux.w3.org>

On Wed, 6 Nov 2002, Pedro Assis in Oporto wrote:

> [freed from spam filter -rrs]
> Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 04:42:09 -0500 (EST)
> Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0211060912530.13945-100000@douro.dee.isep.ipp.pt>
> From: Pedro Assis in Oporto <passis@dee.isep.ipp.pt>
> To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
> Hi,
> I've read several W3C and DAML docs about RDF, RDFS and DAML (DAML+OIL),
> and their role in the Semantic Web project, but I'm still puzzel by the
> answers given to the basic question: "why use RDF-based technology rather
> than only XML-based?" If one use an OO modeling (expressive issue is
> address here) to describe the knowledge related to the target domain,
> translating the resulting schemata to XML, shouldn't the XML output
> address the same functionality as a RDF-based solution? Is it a mater of
> logic/inference capability?

If you took this approach, the XML you generated *could* losslessly be
converted back into a rich body of information. Unfortunately, nobody but
you and your immediate collaborators would be able to do this without
guesswork or special-purpose code, since the mapping that translates
between expressive OO model and the XML serialization would be a 'private'
(custom, proprietary, special-purpose etc) one. RDF's XML syntax provides
one strategy for mapping between expresive OO-style models and an XML
notation. Until we have richer XML schema annotation languages, RDF/XML
may be our best bet for ensuring that rich information models can be
turned into widely-consumable XML and back again easily. Instead of each
application inventing its own conventions for translating into markup, we
each agree to use RDF/XML as a 'good enough' middle ground. That's the
theory, anyway...


Received on Wednesday, 6 November 2002 14:13:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:07:43 UTC