[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
What I meant of course is that RSS 0.90 was in no way a foundation for all
the dreams people have for RDF. It's basically an XML format, and not a very
widely supported one. Don't be confused. Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Danny Ayers" <danny666@virgilio.it>
To: <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 11:06 AM
Subject: RE: [xml-dev] RDF was a bully (was Re: [xml-dev] RDF and the new
releases)
>
> >0.90 was not in any way RDF-compliant.
>
> !
>
> see the cached version of Netscape's RSS) 0.9 spec:
> http://www.purplepages.ie/RSS/netscape/rss0.90.html
>
>
> If you still have any doubts, try copying the sample into the W3C RDF
> validator:
>
> http://www.w3.org/RDF/Validator/
>
> Lovely graph!
> Lovely triples!
> Valid RDF!
>
> A certain amount of FUD is to be expected from vendors that have staked
> their reputation (and probably their dollars) on a different horse, but
this
> is remarkable. On xml-dev. I'm speechless.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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>
>
|
