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

RE: [xml-dev] RDF : Headless Triples syntax

From: Danny Ayers <danny666@virgilio.it>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 11:51:41 +0100
To: "John Cowan" <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
Cc: "Xml-Dev" <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>, "RDF-Interest" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Message-ID: <EBEPLGMHCDOJJJPCFHEFKEPGIHAA.danny666@virgilio.it>


>> I can understand the need for an <rdf:RDF> wall around embedded
>RDF in the
>> current syntax (to keep its Gothic structure out of sight). If
>however the
>> RDF was restricted to (decapitated) one-layer statements, I reckon an
>> <rdf:D> ha-ha is adequate.
>
>Actually, rdf:RDF isn't required, and Reuters Health doesn't use it.

Fair enough. I suppose I was overlaying my own (non-standard)
interpretation.

The recommendation of WG to eschew embedding in XHTML and link in the RDF
instead (see Dave Becketts comments at [1], Sean Palmer's discussion of
approaches to embedding at [2]), yet the obvious benefit of being able to
embed would suggest that this is an issue that is likely to keep
resurfacing.

I must say btw that the Reuters Health data is an excellent example of how
RDF/XML needn't be ugly.

Cheers,
Danny.

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2002Nov/0039.html
[2] http://infomesh.net/2002/rdfinhtml/
Received on Monday, 18 November 2002 06:03:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:57 GMT