- From: Matthews, BM (Brian) <B.M.Matthews@rl.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 25 Nov 2004 16:17:43 -0000
- To: 'Sandro Hawke' <sandro@w3.org>, Ian Davis <iand@internetalchemy.org>
- Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
We started to look at this on the SWAD-Europe project. But never quite finished. http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe/reports/xml_sw_docs/6.3b.html So yes sometime we'll get the demo together too.... Brian > -----Original Message----- > From: www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org > [mailto:www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Sandro Hawke > Sent: 25 November 2004 15:37 > To: Ian Davis > Cc: www-rdf-interest@w3.org > Subject: Re: Is promoting RDF+XML a lost cause? > > > > > > > I guess what I'm suggesting is that converting XML data > to RDF is a > > > darn sight easier than converting XML developers to RDF. > > This is a great quote. GRDDL-like techniques are the order > of the day I > > think. > > My favorite idea at this point is Ontology-Driven XML (ODX), which > should allow people to use their normal XML (as long as it's not too > crazy) mapped to RDF triples based on the rdfs:Class of the > XML element > and attribute names (mapped to URIs). Elements which have type > rdf:Property or rdfs:Class are parsed as in RDF/XML (with stripe > skipping as necessary); datatypes and collection elements can also be > handled. > > One of these days I need to put together a demo.... :-/ > > -- sandro > > >
Received on Thursday, 25 November 2004 16:18:18 UTC