[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread 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..."
[jb]
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.
[jb]
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.
Jonathan
|
