Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: Sean McGrath <email@example.com>
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 09:24:29 +0000
>> [Dan Brickley]
>> >What goes around comes around! The RDF Interest Group  is currently
>> >discussing alternate syntaxes for RDF in XML. Sounds like we're being
>> >told we'd be better off returning to PICS-NGesque s-expressions.
>> [Sean McGrath]
>> Not so AFAIK. I would be interested to read the XML-DEV posts that
>> have lead you to this conclusion. Can you point me at them?
> [Dan Brickley]
>I was being slightly tongue-in-cheek, but the combination of Paul
>Prescod's msg (which I replied to) and previous SML advocacy seemed to
>be heading in this direction. In other words, that for many
>data-oriented applications, XML's document-oriented heritage makes it
>sometimes challenging to use. I'm far from convinced that a return to
>s-expressions, or the creation of a trivial subset (SML), would be
>useful right now.
OK. I see where you are coming from. My position is this:-
1) SML must be allowed to be born so that it can either
die of natural causes or flourish.
2) SML must be a subset (application profile) of XML.
3) To quote Henry Thompson (I think) "We should stop worrying
and learn to love xLink". By which I mean, a lot of
the thunkery that goes on with entities, notations,
PIs etc. might disappear in a puff of logic if only
we had xLink. The combination of SML with a rich
object linking mechanism is and idea that I feel
deserves its 15 minutes of flame:-)
Developers Day co-Chair WWW9, April 2000, Amsterdam
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:email@example.com
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To unsubscribe, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:email@example.com the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org)