- From: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 13:35:08 +0200
- To: semantic_web@googlegroups.com
- Cc: "Semantic Web" <semantic-web@w3.org>
On 4/12/06, Michael Schneider <m_schnei@gmx.de> wrote: > I have learned the XML serialization of RDF a few months ago, which is > called RDF/XML. Now I found out that there is another serialization, > which is called RDF/XML-ABBREV. I did not find anything about it in the > official W3C documents. Can anybody tell me the difference between both > serializations and if this is an offical standard? There are a lot of different ways a particular set of data could be expressed in RDF/XML, which means different stylistic variants are possible. RDF/XML-ABBREV is one such. As far as I'm aware it's more of an informal convention, not something likely to formalised into a standard. The Primer [1] discusses the abbreviated style, it reduces the longhand URIs and tends towards "striping" [2] the XML making it generally easier for human reading/writing. It's also convenient if you want to make an existing XML format RDF-friendly [3]. Another style is to flatten everything into a series individual rdf:Description blocks, each only containing a single statement. Visually unappealing, but easy to create and can be convenient for debugging. There another problem with having different ways of saying the same thing in RDF/XML, it makes it much harder to process using regular XML tools. Morten Frederiksen's done a style, R3X [4], designed to work well with XSLT etc - I'm willing to bet there are other variations on this theme. (Pretty much any XML can be translated into RDF/XML with XSLT if appropriate vocabularies are available, and SPARQL offers a very flexible way of outputing whatever XML you like by slinging its XML results format through XSLT). But the bottom line is that all these variants are RDF/XML, and any RDF/XML parser should be able to understand them all. They're only syntactical, it makes no difference to the underlying model. For a bit of history on how RDF/XML got the way it is, see [5]. Cheers, Danny. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-primer/#newresources [2] http://www.w3.org/2001/10/stripes/ [3] http://www.xml.com/lpt/a/2002/10/30/rdf-friendly.html [4] http://www.wasab.dk/morten/blog/archives/2004/05/30/transforming-rdfxml-with-xslt [5] http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe/200407/swintro/syntaxdesign.html -- http://dannyayers.com
Received on Wednesday, 12 April 2006 11:35:15 UTC