W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > March 2004

Re: on independence of elements, relating versions [XMLVersioning-41]

From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 15:06:30 +0000
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20040318150538.027c6170@127.0.0.1>
To: Bill de hÓra <dehora@eircom.net>
Cc: www-tag@w3.org

At 10:41 18/03/04 +0000, Bill de hÓra wrote:
>IME, 5 are what's needed:
>
>RDF
>  graph +
>    triple *
>      resource
>      property
>      value
[...]

See Trix:
   http://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/2003/HPL-2003-268.html

Also related:
GRDDL:
   http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec
RDF-in-XHTML:
   http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2004/02/xhtml-rdf.html

These are all discussed at the recent SWIG meeting in Cannes:
   http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/interest/meetings/tp2004.html

#g
--

At 10:41 18/03/04 +0000, Bill de hÓra wrote:

>Chris Lilley wrote:
>
>>On Thursday, March 18, 2004, 6:01:14 AM, Tim wrote: TB>  I've on a number 
>>of occasions
>>TB> proposed a brutally minimalit XML syntax for RDf with only three TB> 
>>elements: resource, property, and value.
>>Although XML can be used for 'database dump' structures where all the
>>children of the root are identical. So
>>RDF
>>  triple
>>    resource
>>    property
>>    value
>>  triple
>>    resource
>>    property
>>    value
>>
>>Four elements, entirely regular.
>
>IME, 5 are what's needed:
>
>RDF
>  graph +
>    triple *
>      resource
>      property
>      value
>
>plus some variants for the value (uri, raw xml, typed, etc). In other 
>words, almost everything needed from an XML serialization of RDF can be 
>expressed in a screenful of RNC. It's quite frustrating the W3C haven't 
>sanctioned something like this by now.
>
>cheers
>Bill de hÓra

------------
Graham Klyne
For email:
http://www.ninebynine.org/#Contact
Received on Thursday, 18 March 2004 10:25:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:25 GMT