W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > December 2013

Re: rdf:Description and rdf:about not defined in RDF namespace document

From: Thomas Passin <list1@tompassin.net>
Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2013 11:11:07 -0500
Message-ID: <529B5F9B.4070701@tompassin.net>
To: Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>
On 12/1/2013 6:27 AM, Enrico Daga wrote:
> Hi all,
> (I am following this list since some years, and while I love all about
> Semantic Web)
> I think that RDF/XML is the major responsible of the dissatisfaction
> that many web developers have wrt RDF.
> RDF/XML is an XML but cannot be used by simply parsing it (as XML), you
> need an RDF library and even with that you then have to understand and
> manage a triple set, not a more intuitive tree/DOM-like structure -
> something a web developer is already skilled in.
> So, if you think about the experience a web developer has, it is a kind
> of false seduction: it's XML! But actually it isn't...
> IMHO a simple and easy improvement would be to rewrite the RDF/XML
> specification removing few features and make it similar to a plain old
> XML. It will be still backward compatible (current RDF/XML parser
> doesn't have to be changed, and many RDF/XML serializers already have
> this plain output). This V2 would be *also* usable like any other plain
> XML (similar to an RSS).

This can be achieved by giving those web developers to use a subset of 
RDF/XML (a profile if you like).  That subset can be chosen to be much 
easier to work with for the uninitiated than full RDF, and can be 
processed more easily by a range of XML tools.  No need for changing the 
RDF/XML spec.

For an example, see my paper from Extreme Markup Languages 2007:

Received on Sunday, 1 December 2013 16:11:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 08:45:35 UTC