W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > October 2003

RE: [Fwd: RDFCore 2nd last call announcement]

From: Hammond, Tony (ELSLON) <T.Hammond@elsevier.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 11:50:46 +0100
Message-ID: <54A600C436EA694581B93E4BD4D4788A06B73D1D@elslonexc004.eslo.co.uk>
To: 'Frank Manola' <fmanola@acm.org>
Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org

Hi Frank:

> The point isn't that such applications might not be *more* "useful" with 
> RDFS or OWL schemas;  the point is that the lack of such schemas does 
> not automatically render such applications *not* useful (at least, in my 
> opinion, and presumably in the opinion of anyone designing and using 
> such applications).

I don't deny the utility of these schema-less approaches, but just note they
may be marginal. Sure one can use the RDF data model to generate a data
transfer syntax, or else use a cooked-in schema in the processor. For
general utility in describing a set of resources, one would typically expect
a schema to be made available to an application. Presented with a foreign
graph and no namespace document (or schema), we really don't have very much.

Received on Thursday, 23 October 2003 07:00:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:44:45 UTC