RE: The Tragedy of RSS

> Nick Gibbins
>
> 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.

I agree (more than a bit). 


> 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].

Fair point.


Bill de hÓra 
--
Propylon
www.propylon.com