- From: Alberto Reggiori <alberto@asemantics.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 17:19:51 +0100
- To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: RDF Interest <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
hi Jeremy On Feb 11, 2004, at 3:11 PM, Jeremy Carroll wrote: >> I have also done work with Patrick Stickler on a triple based XML >> syntax and named graphs that I will circulate tomorrow - this too we >> could talk about. > > It can be found at > > http://www-uk.hpl.hp.com/people/jjc/tmp/trix.pdf intriguing approach your :) I found especially tasty the solution you give how to add provenance/context information to RDF graphs - is there any parser or software supporting your new syntax or XSLTs to convert TriX syntax to full-blown RDF/XML? anyhow - while playing here with some pilot projects and trying to sell RDF based solutions to real customers we found very hard selling the XML "bits" of RDF, unless we have a good/smart/clever way to "hide it" behind some more familiar XML shell. Your paper (and others) seems touching this issue at different levels - but we have to admit that we still have problems convincing customers to buy RDF "specific" syntaxes like your TriX - while using them, users are generally scared away - unless it resembles something more familiar to simple "what-you-see-is-what-you-mean" well-formed XML. a part RPV - have you (or other people on this list) ever gave a closer look to more XML "friendly" (or lightweight) approaches to RDF like the xemantics TAP approach? http://tap.stanford.edu/xemantics.html at first sight it looks quite what an XML user would love to see or use :) anyway - nice paper! all the best Alberto
Received on Wednesday, 11 February 2004 11:20:18 UTC