Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
At 03:46 PM 12/1/99 -0800, Tim Bray wrote: >Because the same data structures and usage patterns keep coming back across >wide ranges of metadata applications, even though the world isn't about >to agree on common vocabularies. So there are huge gains to be had from >a common data model and transfer syntax. -Tim That's a very strong motivation. But we have to balance that with another very strong motivation: making the documents easy to understand by the people who need to work with them. By designing your own doctype you can tailor the structure and the language to suit the target audience. RDF may be simple at heart, but is it reasonable to ask the average user to figure it out, to expect that the average user of metadata will even be able to grok the abstractions? I may be reiterating your earlier sentiment, but I worry that the abstractions are as much an impediment as the spec and the syntax. -- Joe Lapp (Looking for some good people to Senior Engineer help create XML technologies that http://www.webMethods.com connect businesses to businesses jlapp@w... over the web.) xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i... Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1 To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; unsubscribe xml-dev To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; subscribe xml-dev-digest List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)
|
