- From: William Grosso <grosso@SMI.Stanford.EDU>
- Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2000 09:52:04 -0800
- To: Jean-Marc Vanel <jmvanel@free.fr>
- CC: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
To a local Java developer's group. The talk went for about 50 minutes (including Q&A) and was to an audience of about 120 developers. Overall, the reception was friendly: people really do understand that straight XML is inadequate and that the semantic web might be a good thing (about a third of the audience seemed to really get why properties need to be independent resources. A much higher percentage than I expected). The most troubling questions revolved around validation. To wit (paraphrasing): The problem with XML is that everything (well, not everything. But almost everything) eventually bottoms out in #PCDATA. XMLSchema directly addresses this. Will RDF have a similar set of data types and a validating parser ? And I said something about the XMLSchema having done a good job on this, and mentioned that the RDF working group has made a commitment to incorporating at least some of the XMLSchema data types [Question: did I misread the Cambridge Communique ?]. There's been some talk about datatypes on this list (cf: the recent thread entitled "do XML Datatypes work for RDF?"). But it would have been very nice to be able to nail this question down with something like "Version 2.0 of the spec, which is expected in [] deals with that by ...." Anybody able to do that ? William Grosso
Received on Wednesday, 8 March 2000 12:52:10 UTC