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

Re: .rdf extension on non-RDF CVS log files?

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 11:49:11 -0500
To: "DuCharme, Bob (LNG-CHO)" <bob.ducharme@lexisnexis.com>
Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Message-ID: <20041129164911.GD20326@homer.w3.org>

* DuCharme, Bob (LNG-CHO) <bob.ducharme@lexisnexis.com> [2004-11-29 11:32-0500]
> In my search for RDF files, I've been finding a lot of things like this[1].
> A View Source shows that they're HTML, typically with a giant pre element
> listing files in them. Is the use of the .rdf file extension for these some
> convention unrelated to Resource Description Framework, like the use of the
> same extension on ReDIF[2] files?

Yep, the ReDIF guys have an attribute/value metadata format in the 
IAFA Templates tradition, and have been using .rdf as a suffix for some
time.

Dan

> thanks,
>  
> Bob DuCharme   www.snee.com/bob <http://www.snee.com/bob>        <bob@  
> snee.com> weblog on linking-related topics: 
> http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/au/1191
> <http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/au/1191> 
>  
> [1]
> http://cvs2.oeone.com/index.cgi/penzilla3/apps/appliancemanagement/content/c
> ontents.rdf
> <http://cvs2.oeone.com/index.cgi/penzilla3/apps/appliancemanagement/content/
> contents.rdf> 
> [2] http://ideas.repec.org/p/rpc/rdfdoc/redif.html
> <http://ideas.repec.org/p/rpc/rdfdoc/redif.html> 
Received on Monday, 29 November 2004 16:49:11 UTC

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