W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > February 2004

Re: hiding RDF (was: Re: RDF Triples in XML, named graphs)

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 18:01:27 +0000
Message-ID: <402A6DF7.3060103@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
To: Alberto Reggiori <alberto@asemantics.com>
Cc: RDF Interest <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>



Alberto Reggiori wrote:

> intriguing approach your :) I found especially tasty the solution you 
> give how to add provenance/context information to RDF graphs - is there 
> any parser or software supporting your new syntax or XSLTs to convert 
> TriX syntax to full-blown RDF/XML?
> 


No not yet, apart from the DTD and XML Schema it's vapourware ...



> anyhow - while playing here with some pilot projects and trying to sell 
> RDF based solutions to real customers we found very hard selling the XML 
> "bits" of RDF, unless we have a good/smart/clever way to "hide it" 
> behind some more familiar XML shell. Your paper (and others) seems 
> touching this issue at different levels - but we have to admit that we 
> still have problems  convincing customers to buy RDF "specific" syntaxes 
> like your TriX - while using them, users are generally scared away - 
> unless it resembles something more familiar to simple 
> "what-you-see-is-what-you-mean" well-formed XML.
> 
> a part RPV - have you (or other people on this list) ever gave a closer 
> look to more XML "friendly" (or lightweight) approaches to RDF like the 
> xemantics TAP approach?



The xslt approach is meant to allow *any* XML syntax and then transform it 
into RDF - i.e. for a specific customer you give them exactly what they want.


> 
> http://tap.stanford.edu/xemantics.html
> 
> at first sight it looks quite what an XML user would love to see or use :)


I have not looked at that.


Jeremy
Received on Wednesday, 11 February 2004 13:27:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:14:58 UTC