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

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

From: Libby Miller <Libby.Miller@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 18:29:54 +0000 (GMT)
To: Pedro Assis in Oporto <passis@dee.isep.ipp.pt>
Cc: Libby Miller <Libby.Miller@bristol.ac.uk>, www-rdf-interest <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.44.0211071818070.3144-100000@mail.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>

sorry it took me a bit to get back to you, Pedro

> Ok. Suppose that I can achieve greater flexibility in managing RDF/RDFS
> model evolution (version, reuse, share, etc) than with OO-modeling+XML.
> Eventually, in XML case, if something is changed at the bottom level -
> knowledge model description - it should be required to change a lot of
> things: model, XML translation, DTD/Schema, parsers, etc. But, IYHO how
> is this handle in RDF/RDFS approach? Is it about RDF triples information
> model, RDFS OO modeling concepts, both, or something else?

hm... interesting. If a model changes in RDF, you'd need to change the
model, and so the RDFSchema. the RDF parsers would not change (though
neither would the XML parser in your case); you'd have to alter the
queries or the API calls. But you wouldn't have to alter the storage of
the data (assuming you were using a native RDF database).

I'm not sure what you mean in your last couple of paragraphs - can you
explain further?

> Yes. XML is document-centric and relies on parser hard-coded information,
> meaning that it is machine readable, regarding its contents, eventually
> with document validation through distributed/centralize DTD or Schema. So,
> elements semantics (or if you like theirs metadata) should be in the
> parsing rules body, but it can be addressed through specific
> elements/attributes that provides the metadata about the element itself.
> But, in the end it remains a rigid structure and still reveals a somewhat
> implicit metadata schema. It is clearly a rigid structure that mirrors an
> also document rigid structure, revealing a syntactic-oriented approach.
> So, the RDF/RDFS advantage is that it moves an layer up the OO concepts,
> and implicitly reveals all OO common advantages: <person> is a class (e.g.
> DAML) and <name> is a class property, and from that I can get more
> information than XML <person> element (flat model representation).

that sounds right to me.

thanks for the feedback,

Received on Thursday, 7 November 2002 13:35:23 UTC

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