• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: RDDL/RDF - no RDF tax?
• From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>
• Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 11:41:24 -0500
• References: <00c801c28e52$7a011930$7c674544@n...>
• User-agent: Opera M2 7.0 build 2345

On Sun, 17 Nov 2002 11:00:40 -0500, Jonathan Borden <jonathan@o...> 
 wrote:

>
> <rddl:resource ID="XSD">
> <rddl:title>XML Schema</rddl:title>
> <rddl:nature resource="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"/>
> <rddl:purpose
> resource="http://www.rddl.org/purposes#schema-validation"/>
> <rddl:related resource="http://example.org/L.xsd"/>
> <rddl:prose>
> <p>An XML Schema for the L language .</p>
> </rddl:prose>
> </rddl:resource>
>
> hopefully the above XML is self explanatory -- in which case this is 
> human
> readable! I think it is more readable than the XLink version.

That's very human readable ... but RDF-challenged as I am, I don't
understand how it uses RDF.  Where is all the cruft that people complain 
about? :-)

Would a "native" RDF processor understand the assertions in there, or would
a RDDL->RDF filter be needed?

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: RDDL/RDF - no RDF tax?
    • From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@f...>
  • Re: RDDL/RDF - no RDF tax?
    • From: "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@o...>
  • Re: RDDL/RDF - no RDF tax?
    • From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>

• References:
  • RDDL/RDF - no RDF tax?
    • From: "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@o...>

• Prev by Date: RDDL/RDF - no RDF tax?
• Next by Date: Re: RDF for unstructured databases, RDF for axiomaticsystems
• Previous by thread: RDDL/RDF - no RDF tax?
• Next by thread: Re: RDDL/RDF - no RDF tax?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread