W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > April 2002

Re: [namespaceDocument-8] RDF and RDDL

From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@mysterylights.com>
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2002 15:13:16 +0100
Message-ID: <0a7301c1df07$88f669e0$62560150@localhost>
To: "Williams, Stuart" <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: "WWW TAG" <www-tag@w3.org>
Hi there,

> > As the author of many, many, RDF-in-XHTML proposals,
>
> Do you have any particular favorites you could point me at.

Sure. The following two are my favourites, making use of (i.e. extending
the woefully inadequate) existing XHTML metadata constructs:-

http://infomesh.net/2001/08/rdfinxhtml/
- Interpreting <link> and <meta> as RDF
(that approach in action:
   http://infomesh.net/2001/tordf/?uri=http://infomesh.net/2001/05/sw/)

http://www.doctypes.org/meta/NOTE-xhtml-augmeta.html
- Augmented Metadata in XHTML (this was actually Murray's work, by and
large)

I've also taken other approaches, such as adding Dublin Core to XHTML with
modularization, and I have an as-yet unpublished article which outlines a
slightly more radical approach for encoding metadata in document formats.
There was also a huge thread about the RDF-in-XHTML topic on
www-rdf-interest:-

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2001Apr/thread#206
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2001Apr/thread#241
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2001Apr/thread#274
- Threads From RDF IG, April 2001

For as long as there has been RDF, there have been people wanting to embed
it in HTML!

> > I smell a hack.
>
> ... or maybe just unwarranted optimism about the ease with
> which XML vocabularies can be mixed ;-).

Or both. But then again, it's not as if I'm pitching <marquee> :-)

--
Kindest Regards,
Sean B. Palmer
@prefix : <http://purl.org/net/swn#> .
:Sean :homepage <http://purl.org/net/sbp/> .
Received on Monday, 8 April 2002 10:14:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:06 GMT