Re: a simpler form of rdf xml

Sandro Hawke wrote:
>>  <a>
>>   <-b->
>>    <c/>
>>   </-b->
>>  </a>
> 
> I kinds of like the idea of just using the case of the first letter,
> where upper case means class names.

That's right. The problem is that you have to work with RDF for a while 
to realize that it's a design pattern built into the good behaving 
ontologies.

If we come up with a proposal for an EXML dialect (E for explicit), I 
think it might be a great bridge for moving people over to the RDF world 
(or transform their XML into RDF automatically)

> Or turn the element into a URI and
> look it up to see whether it's a Class or Property.

that's exactly the kind of things that people from the XML world want to 
avoid (as much as they can).

-- 
Stefano.