[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
"Simon St.Laurent" wrote:
>
>...
>
> Sure thing, but RDF isn't designed with human-readable in mind at all,
> and you've pretty much approached the outer limits of ordinary linking
> in the XML while barely scratching the surface in the RDF example.
That statement is false. Whether you think it succeeded or failed, RDF
*was* designed with human-readability in mind. A reading of the RDF
specification will make that clear.
"rdf additionally provides a means for publishing both
human-readable and machine-processable vocabularies designed to
encourage the reuse and extension of metadata semantics among
disparate information communities."
"Highly condensed expressions such as this are discouraged, however,
when the RDF/XML encoding is written by hand or expected to be edited in
a plain text editor"
"While the serialization syntax shows the structure of an RDF model most
clearly, often it is desirable to use a more compact XML form."
Finally, if readability were not an issue for the RDF community then N3
would not exist! "Notation 3 is an academic excercise in language
designed for a human-readable and scribblable language."
--
"When I walk on the floor for the final execution, I'll wear a denim
suit. I'll walk in there like Willie Nelson, John Wayne, Will Smith
-- Men in Black -- James Brown. Maybe do a Michael Jackson moonwalk."
Congressman James Traficant.
|
