[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
If I understand TimBL's article, it isn't so much
that XML is inconsistent, documents written for human
consumption order the presentation of ideas. To
RDF and most machines, that order isn't significant;
a clean graph is. The human acquires concepts in
the order they read them (and BTW, iaw their
emotional response to them, and that is often
lost in pure logic systems). So XML as Simon
says, has to be able to work for the human where
order is important. RDF has to work for the
predicate logic processor. XML is consistent
in its own definitions of syntax, structure
and optional namespaces, but it has to be able
to express constructs that are ambiguous because
a human can handle those (the handler is
paralogical).
Again, the win-win seems to be to stripe the
XML with RDF constructs.
len
-----Original Message-----
From: Emmanuil Batsis (Manos) [mailto:mbatsis@humanmarkup.org]
No problem. Well, the main difference is that RDF is consistent while
XML is not.
|
