• To: <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: Why RDF is hard
• From: "Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@a...>
• Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 15:09:50 +1100
• References: <r01050400-1022-0C5815D1FA8911D687D90003937A08C2@[192.168.124.21]> <3DD8629F.3000600@p...>

From: "Paul Prescod" <paul@p...>

> I'm not convinced (yet?) that the world divides in to these neat 
> categories. Do you see this as tricky:

Yes, if my data is in XML.

Another approach to the whole thing might be to use XPaths to explicitly mark relations up.
(These could be defaulted in the DTD.)  

 <rddl:resource  id="xhtml" >
      <rddl:title             rdf:aboutPath="..">User Documentation</rddl:title>
      <rddl:description     rdf:aboutPath="..">Reference documentation for L, in XHTML.<rddl:description>
      <rddl:href             rdf:aboutPath="..">http://example.org/schemas/L.html</rddl:href>
      <rddl:purpose        rdf:aboutPath="..">http://www.rddl.org/purposes#reference</rddl:purpose>
      <rddl:nature         rdf:aboutPath="..">http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml> </rddl:nature>
 <rddl:rescource>

Cheers
Rick Jelliffe

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Why RDF is hard
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>

• References:
  • Re: Why RDF is hard
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: Why RDF is hard
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Why RDF is hard
• Next by Date: Re: RDF
• Previous by thread: Re: Why RDF is hard
• Next by thread: Re: Why RDF is hard
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread