- From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2002 09:52:32 +0100
- To: Enrico Silterra <catluver67@yahoo.com>
- Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
At 10:43 AM 4/7/02 -0700, Enrico Silterra wrote: >I am sure this is a silly question, but, >Let's say, that I have an xml document, and I want to >interpret this document as RDF -- can I just wrap it >in rdf:RDF, declare a default name space, and, have >the doc be rdf ? Not silly, but... I think that most XML document contents can be designed to be RDF-compatible, but not every XML document satisfies the RDF form. Roughly, the RDF graph model needs to be matched by a "striping" of the RDF -- see <http://www.w3.org/2001/10/stripes/>. As well as the striped syntax, it may also be necessary to make some use of the RDF attributes rdf:about, rdf:ID and/or rdf:resource to fully capture the desired graph. This tends to make the document format less like "ordinary" XML, and means that you may need to be more explicit about use of namespaces. I have been thinking that an approach of designing XML formats to be RDF compatible may be a good way to get RDF-compatible data more widely deployed on the web, because the particular applicationm for which it is designed can process it using well-established XML processing tools, but the (RDF graph) information contained in it can be accessible to generic RDF tools. An example of this approach is a proposal I have made for representing email message headers and content in RDF: <http://www.ninebynine.org/IETF/Messaging/draft-klyne-message-rfc822-xml-02.txt>. #g ------------------- Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Monday, 8 April 2002 05:02:19 UTC