[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
It doesn't matter. All the article does is show a
way to use them together and to point out some
inconsistencies that will arise if one doesn't
and tries to apply both technologies. Surely that is fair.
RDF may or may not be a killer app language (defined herein
as "any idiot can use it and every idiot will"); in fact,
I'm convinced it never will be. I assert that
for those who need a more model-theoretic sensible
metadata system, it will gain more following. I
believe that like most niche languages, it thrives
as well as the niche is needy. So, for at least
one project I've been working on, I'm a fan of
RDF-friendly XML because for that project, it is
likely that metadata will be a primary application
of the information being tagged. It seems sensible
to make it lightly interoperable with other projects
that have an ontology in the level 0 position of
the monkey semantics.
len
From: Mike Champion [mailto:mc@xegesis.org]
I'm not hostile to RDF (for localized domains in which effective
taxonomies exist, anyway, don't get me started about the "Semantic Web"),
just skeptical that it's worth a significant investment of my time.
Does anyone want to try to persuade us skeptics that RDF's time
has come?
|
