- From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2006 11:22:17 +0900
Le 6 d?c. 2006 ? 04:08, Martin Atkins a ?crit :
> Mike Schinkel wrote:
>>
>> All really sucessful text formats have been easy to edit (why did
>> RSS take off while RDF is still struggling to get off the ground?)
> >
>
> I don't necessarily disagree with your sentiment, but it could be
> argued that RSS has done well while RDF has floundered largely
> because RSS solves a real-world problem (how to get news/weblog
> content into aggregators) while RDF solves a purely theoretical
> problem that less people have a pressing need to solve (A generic
> representation of relationships between resources).
just for the record and if you really want to compare things.
RSS 2.0 is an application of XML
RSS 1.0 is an application of RDF/XML
--
Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
W3C Conformance Manager, QA Activity Lead
QA Weblog - http://www.w3.org/QA/
*** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
Received on Tuesday, 5 December 2006 18:22:17 UTC