RE: [Fwd: RDFCore 2nd last call announcement]

Hi Frank:

> The point isn't that such applications might not be *more* "useful" with 
> RDFS or OWL schemas;  the point is that the lack of such schemas does 
> not automatically render such applications *not* useful (at least, in my 
> opinion, and presumably in the opinion of anyone designing and using 
> such applications).

I don't deny the utility of these schema-less approaches, but just note they
may be marginal. Sure one can use the RDF data model to generate a data
transfer syntax, or else use a cooked-in schema in the processor. For
general utility in describing a set of resources, one would typically expect
a schema to be made available to an application. Presented with a foreign
graph and no namespace document (or schema), we really don't have very much.

Tony