W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > April 2001


From: Jonathan Borden <jborden@mediaone.net>
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 19:50:18 -0400
Message-ID: <06f501c0c799$28a72420$0a2e249b@nemc.org>
To: "Murray Altheim" <altheim@eng.sun.com>
Cc: "RDF Interest" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Murray Altheim wrote:
> ... The *only* way I can imagine (that wouldn't involve
> an act of Congress) would be to have CDATA section nodes containing RDF be
> notation-marked as RDF, such that they get passed off to an RDF schema
> processor for *appropriate* processing. This isn't technically all that
> difficult, but it's religiously and politically unlikely. IMO.

This solution bothers me as RDF is well formed XML. You loose the ability to
easily use common XML software techniques such as SAX and XSLT. Like it or
not, notations have no traction in the XML community and hence software
support doesn't exist.

What is wrong with the approach of including <rdf:RDF> elements within XHTML
defined by an XML Schema module for RDF?

Received on Tuesday, 17 April 2001 20:05:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:44:29 UTC