W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > November 2002


From: Simon St.Laurent <simonstl@simonstl.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 21:18:59 -0500
To: www-tag@w3.org
Message-ID: <r01050400-1021-6FA551FCF77711D69E4A0003937A08C2@[]>

I can't say that I opposed converting RDDL to an RDF form, but I have to
say that the last few days of messages have left me asking why exactly
this is supposed to be such a good idea.

The TAG has made strong comments pushing XHTML in the direction of
XLink. RDDL is currently based on a combination of XHTML and XLink, and
seems in some ways like it should be a poster child for that
integration, yet we've watched the last week pretty much devolve into an
open discussion of the mismatches between RDF and XML.

Can we just halt further insistence on what looks more and more like an
obvious mismatch (square peg, round hole) and get back to using XLink,
which (whatever its faults may be) was at least designed with the
explicit goal of connecting URI-identified resources in an XML

Simon St.Laurent - SSL is my TLA
http://simonstl.com may be my URI
http://monasticxml.org may be my ascetic URI
urn:oid: is another possibility altogether
Received on Wednesday, 13 November 2002 21:18:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:55:55 UTC