Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: David Megginson <email@example.com>
- To: XML Dev <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Thu, 18 Nov 1999 16:17:51 -0500 (EST)
Michael Erdmann writes:
> In Robins mail about the semantic level of XML as well as what
> David and Tim write about the inadequacy of DTD to represent
> meaning, I missed any references to RDF/RDF-Schema (BTW a REC and a
> PR of W3C), that ---as I understand--- exactly are aimed at
> providing a formal, ontological, shareable semantics in the world
> of XML.
Or, you could argue that RDF-Schema simply defines a different kind of
structure -- instead of saying what elements may contain, it says what
classes properties may appear in. It's the same thing, then, but in a
more specific problem domain (the object world).
That said, I'm a big RDF-Schema fan -- it's quite readable, and I'm
finding some serious interest in both RDF and RDF-Schema out there in
the business world. I'd very much like to see RDF-Schema go to REC,
even though it's missing some things I think I need.
> Or do I got something completely wrong.
> Or is XML-DEV not the right place to argue in favor of RDF/RDFS?
This is the best place. There's also an rdf-dev list, but nobody
posts to it.
All the best,
David Megginson email@example.com
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:email@example.com the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:email@example.com)