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

Re: RDDL: Here is some 'real' RDF was: Re: minor RDF tax

From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002 10:58:50 +0000
To: Jonathan Borden <jonathan@openhealth.org>
cc: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>, "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@simonstl.com>, www-tag <www-tag@w3.org>
Message-ID: <12839.1037703530@hoth.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>

>>>Jonathan Borden said:
> Take a look at this example: http://www.rddl.org/RDDL2-example.html
> It browses and is legal RDF, so the decisions left are:

That is true.

> which root element <rdf:RDF> or <html:html> ?

rdf:RDF if you want to call it RDF/XML (caveats, already discussed previously).

> Do we want RDDL to be legal XHTML that contains RDF snippets or legal RDF
> that is browsable? (browsers as you know are quite forgiving).

I was assuming that there would be complaints over:
        <rddl:prose rdf:parseType="Literal">

and the former was more of the (original?) intention of RDDL.

Received on Tuesday, 19 November 2002 05:59:59 UTC

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