- From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 12:53:53 +0100
- To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
I'm sure this'll need some more rewording. Dave --- Summary: postpone [[ The RDF Core WG has considered your last call comment captured in http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#xmlsch-12 raised in (XML Schema) section "4.5. On the relation between RDF and off-the-shelf XML tools (policy, substantive)" http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0489.html and (Butler) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0531.html and decided URL-HERE to postpone it. The main points we felt you raised in this comment are: 1) RDF/XML sucks because - doesn't match the RDF graph model well - many ways to write things (elements, attributes, attribute values , ...) - cannot write a W3C XML Schema, Relax NG schema, XML 1.0 DTD - "not convienient" to use XSLT, use XQuery, other XML tools We know and could give you more problems. However we felt we couldn't fix it all due to the charter constraint: [[The RDF Core WG is neither chartered to develop a new RDF syntax, ...]] -- http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCoreWGCharter Although we note, most of the above XML technologies mentioned above are successfully used with RDF/XML. So we propose to postpone dealing with this in this WG, recording your comments for any future work. 2) RDF and XML need not be on different paths - models, QLs, APIs, editors, tools - this cleft is not required We encourage work to help integrate better but recognise this is heading into larger web architecture issues. 3) Propose that the XML serialization were modified to capture more of the regularity of the RDF data model, offer help. We welcome this offer to help with any new XML serializations. ]]
Received on Thursday, 24 April 2003 07:54:02 UTC