- From: Erik Wilde <dret@berkeley.edu>
- Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2012 09:12:28 -0700
- To: Martynas Jusevičius <martynas@graphity.org>
- CC: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@zoo.ox.ac.uk>, mike amundsen <mamund@yahoo.com>, LDP <public-ldp@w3.org>, W3C provenance WG <public-prov-wg@w3.org>
hello martynas. On 2012-12-22 6:00 , Martynas Jusevičius wrote: > you now seem to pick up the old XML vs. RDF debate and argue that XML > is semantically capable of a lot that RDF can do. my main point was just to point out the architectural similarities between the two stacks, and i i hope i made it sufficiently clear that RDF does have much better capabilities for doing some kinds of things than XML. but you can still compare the stacks and where they sit in the context of web architecture. > I wonder how this aligns with your own ACM article "XML fever" from > 2008 where you state that "Semantic Web technologies have little to do > with the plain Web and XML" and "Semantic Web concepts and tools are > prerequisites for knowledge-intensive computation", etc.? this article is mostly about the applications you build on top of the stacks, and there i think we can safely say that the typical XML application takes a different approach from the typical RDF application. but still, we can look at how they model and use fundamental aspects of services and interactions on a level that should be independent from the preferred metamodel/model stack. cheers, dret.
Received on Saturday, 22 December 2012 16:12:58 UTC