- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 10:29:14 +0100
- To: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>, <GK@ninebynine.org>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
- Cc: <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
> > The greatest value of TriX, IMO (and Jeremy may think differently) is > as a specialized serialization which can be used by the XML community as > an XML friendly expression of RDF, not as a replacement for RDF/XML > for the broader RDF community. > I largely agree. My manager told me that he is eagerly anticipating the public falling out of Carroll and Stickler on some aspect of the TriX work ... unfortunately, he has to wait some more, maybe next week :) One way that TriX might replace RDF/XML is, once we have XSLT 2.0 and a transform from RDF/XML into TriX (all doable), it is trivial to migrate an RDF/XML document into TriX (a one line change, adding a processing instruction). Having done that, it is also possible to add your own additional transforms. Thus the idea of XSLT as a general syntactic extension mechanism can extend from TriX into RDF/XML - whether that would be good or not I don't know - a bit like C preprocessor macros - you can do a lot, it is very powerful. In particular, you can make your code unreadable to anyone other than yourself. Jeremy
Received on Friday, 27 February 2004 04:29:27 UTC