[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- To: <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
- Subject: RE: [xml-dev] Re: Living Documents (Was: We need SAX etc ..)
- From: "Chris Wilper" <cwilper@cs.cornell.edu>
- Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 13:47:59 -0400
- Thread-index: AcJ8TLTKJ8Slzok8TNK7hlRUvQeOfAAABGog
- Thread-topic: [xml-dev] Re: Living Documents (Was: We need SAX etc ..)
> I completely agree. So where exactly does that leave RDF? :)
Hah, in the eye of the beholder, surely.
It's good to uniquely label concepts and relate them, though.
It helps us talk, even though our worldviews don't exactly converge.
Personally I hope the RDDL-as-RDF effort ends up giving labels
to some of the common concepts around schema, xml names, and formats
and such....and that people (and machines) can use them effectively.
It could be too high a hope. We'll see.
- Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: Joe Gregorio [mailto:joe@bitworking.org]
Sent: Friday, October 25, 2002 1:36 PM
To: John Cowan; xml-dev@lists.xml.org
Subject: Re: [xml-dev] Re: Living Documents (Was: We need SAX etc ..)
John Cowan wrote:
> Objective "meaning" is a myth: reality is too subtle to be snared in a
> net of words however cleverly chosen.
I completely agree. So where exactly does that leave RDF? :)
-joe
--
http://bitworking.org
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
|
