- From: Chimezie Ogbuji <chimezie@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2007 00:05:42 -0400
- To: www-tag@w3.org
- Cc: "Alan Ruttenberg" <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>, semantic-web@w3.org
>> I would recommend that each document be available in both HTML and >> RDF using content negotiation or just RDF with a style sheet that >> makes it legible, or just HTML with GRDDL. > -1 for content negotiation. (very un-semantic web like to have non- > inspectable communications, and confusion about what a name=URI means) > +1 for RDF + style sheet. (very semantic-web like to have knowledge first, and presentation separated) Actually, I think machine-readable with follow-your-nose-hooks to get human-readable data and vice versa are both equally advantageous (none is more semantic-web-like than the other). It's more a question of the system (or network) the data are in and whether you have more human consumers than machine consumers. For the general case you still (currently) have more human consumers than machine consumers, so there is a *slight* advantage in presenting HTML, XHTML, or well-formed but invalid XHTML, and allowing the smaller population of consumers to get RDF on demand (GRDDL, HTTP / HTML metadata & links,RDFa,...) -- Chimezie
Received on Tuesday, 10 April 2007 04:05:45 UTC