- From: Bohnenberger, Keith <KBohnenberger@mcdonaldbradley.com>
- Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 09:13:41 -0400
- To: "RDF Interest list" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
I am relatively new to RDF but Im not sure I understand the comparison. Isnt RDF all about the graph. The subject, predicate and object and what you can do with them. OWL is a standard for describing specific subject, predicates and objects for ontology representation and inference. XML just happens to be one syntax for representing RDF but XML does not seem to be the important part of RDF (not withstanding the common serialization, transporting, parsing etc). The logical capabilities of RDF do not seem to have anything to do with XML. Once again, I am relatively new to RDF but this is what I gathered from a bunch of reading. Am I missing something? Keith -----Original Message----- From: Ian Stuart [mailto:Ian.Stuart@ed.ac.uk] Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 7:04 AM To: RDF Interest list Subject: Re: Explaining why we use RDF instead of just XML On Wed, 2003-06-25 at 12:53, Trent Shipley wrote: > Unfortunately, this makes RDF sound like a complex and expensive way to define > a simple namespace. How is an RDF application different from an > XML-Namespace? My understanding is that, yes, it is a complex and expensive way to implement namespaced XML. The benefit is that there is a common agreement of the basic structure of the XML data, defined and agreed by consensus. The benefit of this is that the XML document should be largely understandable by all those who can interpret RDF-structured data. The only grey area is when one starts to encode a new type of data, not previously covered by another RDF subset. As has been mentioned elsewhere (some web page I read a week or so ago), RDF, et al, swell the size of the resultant data object by a significant amount. The trade-off is between making the XML data-object and the interoperability (another big word that sounds more important that it really is :-) of the data -- --==++ Ian Stuart, Perl Laghu. EDINA, Edinburgh University. Information is not knowledge Knowledge is not wisdom Wisdom is not truth Truth is not beauty Beauty is not love Love is not music -- Mary. Works web site: http://edina.ac.uk/ Personal web site: http://lucas.ucs.ed.ac.uk/
Received on Wednesday, 25 June 2003 10:00:41 UTC