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

Re: My action item on RDDL/RDF

From: Bill de hÓra <dehora@eircom.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 12:08:43 +0000
Message-ID: <3DD0EF4B.8060009@eircom.net>
To: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
CC: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>, Paul Prescod <paul@prescod.net>, WWW-Tag <www-tag@w3.org>

Tim Bray wrote:

> So why can't we have an RDF syntax that actually exposes the 
> Resource/Property/Value structure in an obvious way, and doesn't depend 
> on qname magic and schemas that aren't recommendations, but is still XML 
> and hence handy for interchange?

If by we you mean the W3, then the answer is that the charter RDF 
Core is working under doesn't provide the scope to start from 
scratch (though RDF Core did create a new syntax for test cases). 
This question has be asked many times on rdf-interest - the answer 
always boils down to the current charter.

Bill de hÓra

--
Propylon
www.propylon.com
Received on Tuesday, 12 November 2002 07:11:54 GMT

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