- From: Hammond, Tony (ELSLON) <T.Hammond@elsevier.com>
- Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 11:50:46 +0100
- 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. Tony
Received on Thursday, 23 October 2003 07:00:03 UTC