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

RE: Is promoting RDF+XML a lost cause?

From: Matthews, BM (Brian) <B.M.Matthews@rl.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 16:17:43 -0000
Message-ID: <350DC7048372D31197F200902773DF4C04840034@exchange11.rl.ac.uk>
To: 'Sandro Hawke' <sandro@w3.org>, Ian Davis <iand@internetalchemy.org>
Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org


We started to look at this on the SWAD-Europe project.  
But never quite finished.

http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe/reports/xml_sw_docs/6.3b.html

So yes sometime we'll get the demo together too....

Brian

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org
> [mailto:www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Sandro Hawke
> Sent: 25 November 2004 15:37
> To: Ian Davis
> Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Is promoting RDF+XML a lost cause? 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > > I guess what I'm suggesting is that converting XML data 
> to RDF is a
> > > darn sight easier than converting XML developers to RDF.
> > This is a great quote. GRDDL-like techniques are the order 
> of the day I 
> > think.
> 
> My favorite idea at this point is Ontology-Driven XML (ODX), which
> should allow people to use their normal XML (as long as it's not too
> crazy) mapped to RDF triples based on the rdfs:Class of the 
> XML element
> and attribute names (mapped to URIs).  Elements which have type
> rdf:Property or rdfs:Class are parsed as in RDF/XML (with stripe
> skipping as necessary); datatypes and collection elements can also be
> handled.
> 
> One of these days I need to put together a demo....    :-/
> 
>     -- sandro
> 
> 
> 
Received on Thursday, 25 November 2004 16:18:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:14:57 UTC