• To: "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@c...>
• Subject: Re: RDDL/RDF - no RDF tax?
• From: "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@o...>
• Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 22:06:01 -0500
• Cc: <xml-dev@l...>
• References: <00c801c28e52$7a011930$7c674544@n...> <f5by97qk3om.fsf@e...>

Henry S. Thompson wrote:

> Does this mean that RDDL2 documents are _not_ XHTML?  This seems a
> backward step to me -- one of the things I _really_ like about RDDL is
> that when you point a browser at a namespace name which points to an
> RDDL doc, something sensible happens.

Most certainly not. http://www.rddl.org/RDDL2 proposes XHTML+RDF formats
(its just a proposal and not yet in final form). I've also shown
http://www.rddl.org/RDDL2-example.html which is an RDF/XML document (not
XHTML despite its extension) that *does* display in a browser -- I doubt
that we'd pick this (pure RDF/XML) format for RDDL2, instead go with a XHTML
+ RDF hybrid.
>

Jonathan

http://www.jonathanborden-md.com
http://www.erieneurosurgery.com
http://www.openhealth.org

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: RDDL/RDF - no RDF tax?
    • From: ht@c... (Henry S. Thompson)

• References:
  • RDDL/RDF - no RDF tax?
    • From: "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@o...>
  • Re: RDDL/RDF - no RDF tax?
    • From: ht@c... (Henry S. Thompson)

• Prev by Date: Re: XML and XSLT help needed
• Next by Date: RE: The perils of P18S (was Re: Why RDF is hard )
• Previous by thread: Re: RDDL/RDF - no RDF tax?
• Next by thread: Re: RDDL/RDF - no RDF tax?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread