- From: Nick Gibbins <nmg@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 13:40:43 +0100
- To: www-rdf-interest Mailing List <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Bill de hÓra <dehora@eircom.net> writes: >>> In the meantime, Dublin Core strikes me as sufficient RDF for RSS >>> 2.0. >> Point of information: Dublin Core is a bibliographic metadata >> vocabulary which is independent from, and which predates RDF. > Yes. In the context of this discussion, DC in RSS [x] is going to go > through RDF; so with all due respect I think you're splitting hairs. This is a fair criticism - I was splitting hairs rather more than I ought. > Unless you think RDF should be cut out and DC embedded in a > different way in RSS? Absolutely not; I'm fully in favour of expressing RSS itself in RDF (as in RSS 1.0), and regard the RDF-free RSS 2.0 as a bit of a retrograde step. However, I question whether the use of DC-in-RDF [1] elements in a document which is not an RDF document can really be said to be a use of RDF per se, especially given that the element names are identical to those used in a 'pure' XML encoding of DC [2]. [1] Expressing Simple Dublin Core in RDF/XML http://dublincore.org/documents/2001/11/28/dcmes-xml/ [2] Guidelines for implementing Dublin Core in XML http://dublincore.org/documents/2002/09/09/dc-xml-guidelines/ -- Nick Gibbins nmg@ecs.soton.ac.uk IAM (Intelligence, Agents, Multimedia) tel: +44 (0) 23 80592831 Electronics and Computer Science fax: +44 (0) 23 80592865 University of Southampton
Received on Friday, 4 October 2002 08:40:48 UTC