• To: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>, <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: RelaxNG question
• From: "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@o...>
• Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2003 20:10:17 -0400
• References: <r02000000-1026-CD458AFCD1D711D7A2D00003937A08C2@[192.168.124.11]>

> jonathan@o... (Jonathan Borden) writes:
> >FWIW, RelaxNG can be used to define the RDF/XML syntax.
> >http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar/#section-RELAXNG-Schema (the
> >schema has some errors, but is close). Note that when viewed as
> >compact RelaxNG, the RDF/XML syntax doesn't seem _all that_ complex.
>
> Cool - what are the errors?
>
> The spec doesn't list them.

I think
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JulSep/0274.html .
Somehow the "- (local:* " got deleted from the initial stabs at this, but
I'm unsure if that was intentional.

Jonathan

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: RelaxNG question
    • From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@b...>

• References:
  • Re: RelaxNG question
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: The need for a formal description
• Next by Date: Re: A standard approach to glueing together reusable XMLfragments in prose?
• Previous by thread: Re: RelaxNG question
• Next by thread: Re: RelaxNG question
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread