• To: "xml-dev@l..." <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: RDDL/RDF - no RDF tax?
• From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>
• Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 15:28:55 -0500
• References: <00c801c28e52$7a011930$7c674544@n...><oprf0lzak6ezizxn@localhost> <013701c28e73$0d648570$7c674544@n...>
• User-agent: Opera M2 7.0 build 2345

On Sun, 17 Nov 2002 14:53:51 -0500, Jonathan Borden

> that XML makes the following assertions:
>
> <#foo> rdf:type rddl:resource .
> <#foo> rddl:nature <http://example.org/nature> .
> <#foo> rddl:nature <http://example.org/purpose> .
> <#foo> rddl:nature <http://example.org/L.dtd> .
> <#foo> rddl:prose "<p>A description of the 'L' language>"^^rdf:XMLLiteral 
> .

How does the RDF processor know that the rddl:resource is an rdf:type?
or that the rddl:prose content is an rdf:XMLLiteral?
Is there an RDF schema somewhere that asserts this?

More generally, can one use RDF schema to keep the author of an XML
document only minimally aware of the RDF underpinnings?

• 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...>

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

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