Re: some questions on RefactoringRDF draft

[Replying to RDF core list rather than RDF comments;  I think this is 
mainly a WG issue, but I've no objection to it being copied publicly if 
anyone thin that helps.  But we've been asked not to cross-post messages 
within and without the WG.]

At 05:02 AM 9/11/01 -0400, Dan Brickley wrote:
> > Whilst we have not defined a processing model for RDF, I think the
> > answer to the question asked is that NO an RDF processor
> > is not expected to process arbritary XML.  It is only expected to
> > process RDF/XML.
>
>Maybe we could pick a common use case here: RDF embedded inside another
>RDF vocabulary. The SVG spec has just gone to REC, and provides a space
>for chunks of RDF to be encoded within an SVG doc.
>
>see http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-SVG-20010904/metadata.html
>
>An XHTML doc might contain several islands of SVG; which in turn might
>contain several islands of RDF. I would hope that "RDF tools" would make
>it easy to get to the triples from each such RDF island, and to do so in a
>way that allowed my app to understand the context in which they were
>found. Whether RDF tool = RDF island, I don't know (or, I guess, care too
>much). Some combination of RDF and XML processor is going to have to make
>this easy, since it'll be a useful thing to do. While it isn't our job to
>define APIs between RDF and XML processors, we should make it clear that
>'pure RDF' parsers will likely be involved in the context of
>mixed-namespace XML handling.

I think that this is an application issue, beyond the scope of the RDF spec 
to either require or prohibit.

The purpose of the core RDF spec is, IMO, to state what constitutes 
well-formed RDF, and to state how it may be interpreted.  I think our job 
is easier if we focus on this.

#g


------------
Graham Klyne
GK@NineByNine.org

Received on Tuesday, 11 September 2001 06:42:55 UTC