W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-logic@w3.org > May 2001

Re: N3 vs. XML (rdf:parseType)

From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 16:41:14 +0100
Message-Id: <>
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
At 11:11 AM 5/22/01 -0500, Dan Connolly wrote:
>There are a few pieces of software that can parse that RDF;
>it's not broken...
> > see http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-logic/2001May/0303.html
>rdf:parseType is an extension mechanism... the RDF 1.0
>spec says that rdf:parseType="log:quote" (just like
>rdf:parseType="daml:collection") may be treated
>like rdf:parseType="literal"; i.e. "the value
>of this property is a blob of un-interpreted XML".
>So if you use this extension mechanism, not all
>the RDF tools will grok; but (a) they shouldn't
>fall over; it's clear where the end of the
>extended-syntax section is, and (b) if they don't grok the
>semantics of the terms (log:implies,
>anyway, there's no harm in using a syntactic

Hmmm...  this may be the case, but absent a common understanding of the 
basic RDF semantics (e.g. "reification") I'm not sure that it's really 
helpful to be suggesting this kind of extension.


Graham Klyne
Received on Tuesday, 22 May 2001 12:48:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:45:38 UTC