- From: Karsten-A. Otto <ottoka@cs.tu-berlin.de>
- Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2001 11:49:10 +0200 (MET DST)
- To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Hello, I like the idea of an RDF Protocol, but IMHO it should then be *pure* RDF and, by consequence, use pure XML. So I dont understand your design decision to use FORMFEED as a separator. In my experience an XML end tag is enough to delimit scope. Also, why do you want each "message" to be a whole RDF Model? There is a dc:Type element, which defines the nature of the contents of a resource description; among other things it can indicate an "Event". You could use this to define a "message" to be an inline resoure (rdf:ID) of dc:Type Event, within the context of a singe RDF Model that defines a kind of "session" starting with the <rdf:RDF ...> and ending with </rdf:RDF> (the later meaning quite literally "There is nothing more to be said" :-). You could also send other RDF than Event messages to provide session specific or longer lasting data, such as presence information or a list of IRC channels you joined. If you check the Jabber links provided by Alberto, you will see a similarity to the ideas above. Actually I am currently using Jabber for event passing with some success, but as my project is moving towards RDF a pure RDF protocol probably fits better... Regards, Karsten
Received on Tuesday, 27 March 2001 04:55:13 UTC