[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
jonathan@openhealth.org (Jonathan Borden) writes:
>Sorry, I was refering to RDF itself, as opposed to RDF/XML. the much
>maligned XML serialization syntax.
So was I. The serialization syntax merely makes a bad situation worse.
>Do you mean RDF/XML as a syntax is difficult, or what goes on after
>the RDF/XML syntax is transformed into a set of triples being hard? I
>fully agree that if the problem is that lack of a clearcut
>relationship between syntax and triples, then by all means change the
>RDF/XML syntax. Indeed many RDF folks have essentially abandonded
>RDF/XML itself for N3/N-triples.
N3 makes a bad situation clear. That clarity doesn't help those of us
who don't think in triples and don't have the patience to string triples
together into structures.
For those who think in triples, RDF is a delight. I just wish those
people would recognize that a lot of people cannot and will not be
joining them in that delight.
-------------
Simon St.Laurent - SSL is my TLA
http://simonstl.com may be my URI
http://monasticxml.org may be my ascetic URI
urn:oid:1.3.6.1.4.1.6320 is another possibility altogether
|
