RE: Re: Accessibility of "CHM" format resources

Orion,

Of course you are right that not everything has to be in XML. But I would
say that in this case it's more that RDF/XML wasn't a very good
serialisation of RDF in XML. It certainly didn't leverage the existing
knowledge of authors. You might be interested in a paper that discusses
using attributes to carry the metadata, and part of its power is, I would
argue, that it *does* leverage authors' existing skills:

  <http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2004/rdf-a.html>

It's a little out of date, but it provided the foundation for the metadata
approach taken in XHTML 2.

Regards,

Mark


Mark Birbeck
CEO
x-port.net Ltd.

e: Mark.Birbeck@x-port.net
t: +44 (0) 20 7689 9232
w: http://www.formsPlayer.com/
b: http://internet-apps.blogspot.com/

Download our XForms processor from
http://www.formsPlayer.com/ 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Orion Adrian
> Sent: 07 June 2005 16:01
> To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Re: Accessibility of "CHM" format resources
> 
> 
> On 6/7/05, Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@x-port.net> wrote:
> > Orion,
> > 
> > > This is what RDF should have looked like in the beginning.
> > > This should have come first and then who needs RDF in XML.
> > 
> > Mmm...well, people who use XML, for a start.
> 
> Is this where the means become the end?
> 
> XML has the ability, albiet not cleanly (it's all character 
> data), to embed data in formats other than XML.
> 
> Orion Adrian
> 
> 
>

Received on Tuesday, 7 June 2005 16:31:28 UTC