[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@fourthought.com>
- To: David Megginson <david@megginson.com>
- Date: Sun, 24 Dec 2000 15:55:01 -0700 (MST)
> Uche Ogbuji writes:
>
> > OK, David, so maybe you can help me out here. Why would any one even
> > suggest RDF qua RDF as a "general-purpose XML data format"? What does
> > this even mean? Does this mean that if I don't have a schema in mind,
> > that I wrap my xml in an <rdf:RDF> element and conform to the RDF M&S?
> > Yikes. even an RDF booster such as I would scarecely suggest such a
> > thing.
>
> No, what I mean is that if you need to represent data structures in
> XML, then RDF is a reasonable choice (as is the SOAP serialization
> format). Consider this Java interface
A ha. I think I understand where I went off the rails following this
discussion.
We were talking about a semantic web mock-up using data cobbled together
about XML-DEV denizens. Then after a chain of discussion in which I
might not have been paying attention, Dave Winer asked why we didn't use
SOAP serialization rather than RDF.
Now, I hope we can agree that what we want out of the SW mock-up is hardly
just a bunch of little bundles of rigid OO instances for each XML-DEVver.
If this is all the SW provides, who needs it?
My idea is to build a small hypermedia framework. There would be
free-form data (POP XML), some with local schematics (namespaces),
unadorned links (XLink), associations (Topic Maps), and a graph model to
tie it together (RDF).
Then on top of that would be the processing. Transforms and views (XSLT),
on-line services (SOAP) and inference (RIL, OIL, Connolly's rule schema).
I certainly don't think that yet another employee database demo is a rich
enough target to capture the claims of the SW.
--
Uche Ogbuji Principal Consultant
uche.ogbuji@fourthought.com +1 303 583 9900 x 101
Fourthought, Inc. http://Fourthought.com
4735 East Walnut St, Ste. C, Boulder, CO 80301-2537, USA
Software-engineering, knowledge-management, XML, CORBA, Linux, Python
|
