- From: Tom Van Eetvelde <tom.van_eetvelde@alcatel.be>
- Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 10:18:20 +0100
- To: Renato Iannella <renato@iprsystems.com>
- CC: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
- Message-ID: <3A13A65C.945DA498@alcatel.be>
Renato Iannella wrote: > [...] > > RDF 2.0 should be completely expressable with XML Schema. > (The web can only handle one schema language) > > Until this happens, RDF will always be the "poorer cousin" to XML > Schema. Hello Renato, I disaggree with this. I'll give a practical example where XML Schema and RDF essentially differ from each other. RDF schema provides 'XML' tags to represent resources. Each resource has the right to exist on its own in an RDF instance (XML serialized) document. This means that you can start the document with any tag from your schema. XML schema tells you how tags are nested. However, only some tags may appear as first tag of a XML document instance. This is essentially the difference in practice (for people coming from an XML world)! Suppose you have the following model in mind: a person has a name consisting out of a first name, last name and a nickname. This gives the XML tags: <Person>, <Name>, <FirstName>, <LastName>, <NickName>. With your XML schema, you have to define how these tags can be nested and what may be the roottags. If you want several roottags to be possible, you need to construct several XML Schema's. In an RDF schema, you need to define the relationship between these tags, but more importantly, once you have your schema (only 1), you can start your document with any tag and add tags in any order. Tags don't even have to be nested as each resource has an ID to which you can refer. I hope this helps. I tried to write it for people with an XML background, trying to leave out as much as possible RDF terminoligy. Greetings, Tom.
Received on Thursday, 16 November 2000 04:21:20 UTC