- From: Peter Crowther <Peter.Crowther@networkinference.com>
- Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 22:39:57 -0000
- To: "Jingdong Liu" <jingdong.liu@sympatico.ca>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Note: The following are personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect the consensus of opinion in the Web Ontology Working Group. > From: Jingdong Liu [mailto:jingdong.liu@sympatico.ca] > Does someone know why OWL keep the syntax of RDF? Because it was politically unacceptable to W3C for OWL not to keep the syntax of RDF. This is one of the discussions that has kept cropping up on the Web Ontology Working Group mailing list. > And saying the following > two expressions are the same and both allowed > <owl:Class rdf:ID="Continent"/> <rdf:Description > rdf:about="#Continent"> > <rdf:type rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#Class"/> > </rdf:Description>Can we get rid of RDF?J LIU RDF has the advantage that it's possible to load sets of triples from many sources and there's an obvious merge simply by merging the resultant graphs. That's somewhat harder with a straight XML encoding, though by no means impossible - there is an XML encoding of OWL, for example. - Peter
Received on Monday, 24 February 2003 17:40:29 UTC