Hi All, I've been reading a lot of XML vs RDF heat recently, and am thinking that we've got a bit of a unsurmountable problem when it comes to XML. I'm arriving at the opinion that we'll never be able to convince the majority of developers and hackers to use RDF/XML instead of XML. It's just too complicated, even in a cut down form. I suspect that even a striped XML format is too confusing (the team I work for had problems with this, and they're bright people). Why? I think it's because the RDF model isn't obvious in the serialisation. The XML infoset is palatable because it corresponds to what people see when they read XML - i.e. a tree with attributes. Unfortunately people don't see triples (or a graph) when looking at RDF/XML - they see a tree, with additional nasty RDF syntax. I'm not sure what the solution is. Ideally we'd be pushing a simpler, terse, more graph-friendly syntax (maybe a cut down version of turtle). The problem of course is that most developers hearts and minds are already committed to XML for data interchange. Maybe pushing turtle more is a good idea. What do people think? Cheers, PhilReceived on Tuesday, 23 November 2004 17:17:52 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:44:53 UTC