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

Indeed, this "rdf:RDF" requirement makes otherwise compact RDF annotations
somewhat bulky.
I would propose that processors may derive RDF-ness of the metadata
by resolving namespace URI to see if it is an RDF schema.
Otherwise it may just ignores the metadata.

Currently most RDF processors require "resolvability" of  schema URI-s.
With this proposal they will only assume that they are parsing an RDF
fragment
if the namespace resolves to an RDF schema.

--Nikita.

Dan Brickley wrote:
>
> 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
>
>
>
>


Nikita Ogievetsky,  Consultant.     Cogitech Inc.
email: nogievet@cogx.com   phone: (917) 406-8734
web: http://www.cogx.com   Cogito Ergo XML

"Building, Aggregating and Navigating Information Systems."
New York Associated Topics Seminar. November 18, 2002
http://www.cogx.com/associatedtopics/

Received on Friday, 27 September 2002 10:37:11 UTC