- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 21:51:22 -0400 (EDT)
- To: "NJ Rogers, Learning and Research Technology" <Nikki.Rogers@bristol.ac.uk>
- Cc: Ian Dickinson <ian.dickinson@hp.com>, RDF interest group <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>, dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk
On Thu, 14 Oct 2004, NJ Rogers, Learning and Research Technology wrote: >> The SKOS Web Service (demo at http://thes.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/demos/get and >> links to source etc) doesn't seem to actuallly return RDF, but it is >> runnng over an RDF system so presumably this is a matter of tweaking the >> source a bit. >[There are tools to do the conversion] >ii) The RPC/Encoded versus Document/Literal debate was something of a >minefield at the time we were developing the SKOS Web Service. Tool support >then was significantly stronger for RPC/Encoded than Document/Literal. We >have documented the fact that Industry has since swung in favour of >Document/Literal - and advise that Document/Literal is a good direction for >the SKOS Web Service. Possibly a SOAP response format that is RDF/XML and >constrained both by an XML schema and an RDF schema would be an interesting >approach for maximised interoperability? Yep. In various bits of stuff I have looked at using the "XML stack" (i.e. tools that are XML-aware but not RDF aware) this has seemed like a useful approach to get cheap interoperability. Cheers Chaals
Received on Monday, 18 October 2004 01:51:22 UTC