W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > February 2004

Re: hiding RDF (was: Re: RDF Triples in XML, named graphs)

From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 18:01:27 +0000
Message-ID: <402A6DF7.3060103@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
To: Alberto Reggiori <alberto@asemantics.com>
Cc: RDF Interest <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>

Alberto Reggiori wrote:

> 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?

No not yet, apart from the DTD and XML Schema it's vapourware ...

> 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?

The xslt approach is meant to allow *any* XML syntax and then transform it 
into RDF - i.e. for a specific customer you give them exactly what they want.

> http://tap.stanford.edu/xemantics.html
> at first sight it looks quite what an XML user would love to see or use :)

I have not looked at that.

Received on Wednesday, 11 February 2004 13:27:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:44:47 UTC