Re: QNames in attributes yet?

On Thursday, September 20, 2001, at 01:48  AM, wrote:

> Do you then consider the other changes in the revamped DTD to
> be less backwards compatible?

Well, yes. I don't believe we've added any serious new features 
like you're suggesting.

> One of the most frequent complaints I hear about RDF serializations
> (and often speak myself ;-) is the burdensome use of long URIs
> to define RDF and RDF Schema instances.

Perhaps you would benefit by using something like Notation3 
syntax to write out RDF documents, and then use a tool like CWM 
to convert them into RDF/XML or N-Triples. RDF/XML isn't a very 
good language for humans to write RDF in, IMO.

> What is the feeling of the RDF community about this, particularly
> those implementing systems?

Obviously, the working group is very open to feedback -- are 
there people out there who really want this feature? Are 
developers interested in implementing it?

I haven't heard much so far, but if there's a significant 
response, I will take that information back to the Working Group.

[ "Aaron Swartz" ; <> ; <> ]

Received on Sunday, 23 September 2001 02:18:12 UTC