- From: Souri Das <Souripriya.Das@oracle.com>
- Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2010 11:01:46 -0400
- To: RDB2RDF WG <public-rdb2rdf-wg@w3.org>
I have not had time to carefully go thru Richard's justifications for RDF serialization yet, but I think RDF serialization may be needed. But, we should also consider having an XML syntax just b/c of its popularity and widespread familiarity. However, as Ashok said, if we have more than one syntax we should also have tools to translate from one syntax to another. Thanks, - Souri. ashok malhotra wrote: > If we are arguing syntax then we are done :-) > > If we end up with more than one syntax it would be good if it was > possible > to automatically translate from one syntax to the other. > All the best, Ashok > > > Michael Hausenblas wrote: >>> I propose to proceed based on the concepts of Souri's approach, but >>> with an RDF serialization instead of XML as the surface syntax. >>> >> >> +1 >> >> Cheers, >> Michael >> >> >
Received on Wednesday, 25 August 2010 15:02:31 UTC