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

RE: parsers that don't need rdf:RDF?

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 10:00:01 -0400 (EDT)
To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>
cc: Bob DuCharme <bobdc@snee.com>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0209270958210.16173-100000@tux.w3.org>

On Fri, 27 Sep 2002, Jeremy Carroll wrote:

>
>
> >
> > I know that the W3C's "RDF Validation Service" at
> > http://www.w3.org/RDF/Validator/ and the downloadable ARP RDF
> > processor underneath it don't require RDF statements to be
> > enclosed inside of an rdf:RDF element. Are there any others that
> > anyone can suggest?
> >
>
> Something I've not done, which I think would be legal according to the spec
> is allow you to switch ARP in at an arbitrary point in your XML doc ...
>
>
> <blah>
>   <blah>
>     <blah>
>   <!-- this is RDF content because I just know -->
>
>
>   <!-- end RDF content -->
>     </blah>
>    </blah>
> </blah>
>
> I think an RDF implementation that worked with a SAX parser or a DOM and
> allowed the user to choose which bit of the doc was RDF would be compliant;
> but no-ones asked me for that.

This would probably be useful for things like SVG, which have blobs of RDF
down inside a <metadata> tag, potentially several per document.

Dan
Received on Friday, 27 September 2002 10:00:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:56 GMT