Lists Home |
Date Index |
Nicolas LEHUEN wrote:
"...I'd like to remind you that RDDL is not the only way to do this,
far from it, RDF being another serious candidate. RDF is not perfect either
for this purpose..."
RDF, TM, XML Schema, RELAXNG, and natural language text. are all better
than RDDL at describing "Resources". RDDL is _simply_ intended to serve as a
mechanism that allows all the above to happily _coexist_. I believe the
'Semantic Web' will not be dicted from a single source and use a single
language or protocol, rather pieces of it will spring up much as the
internet itself arose from a patchwork of connected networks. RDDL is simply
a 'router' that allows an intelligent machine (or human) to pick from any or
all of the above ways to describe a 'resource'.
Human-readable documentation is another important problem, with lots of
specifics consequences, amongst which the need to deal with
internationalisation. Come on, you can't be serious about using xml:lang.
Browsers don't support this, and the whole objective of RDDL is that by
pointing my browser to a RDDL URL, I can see some documentation appear in my
browser, right ? So either you tackle this problem with browser friendly
solutions, or you drop the idea of stuffing ALL resources and documentation
in the same document.
Please solve this problem and I am more than sure that XML-DEV will be happy
to modify RDDL to include this solution to the problem of
internationalisation. We work with what we have. "xml:lang" is what we have.
Not perfect I agree.