OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   Re: [xml-dev] ANN: owl.dtd

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

"Rick Jelliffe" <ricko@allette.com.au> wrote:
| From: "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@openhealth.org>

|> I don't think it is possible to write a DTD that validates all legal 
|> RDF documents and invalidates all documents that are not legal RDF. 

An insight distilled from this opinion would be useful.  That is, *why* is
a DTD unlikely?  Or, what is necessarily possible in RDF/XML that the DTD
formalism can't capture?  (Which might raise questions such as, why need
RDF/XML have its particular XML representation if, say, another equally
expressive one were possible to describe with a DTD?)   

|> It *is* possible to do this with RELAX NG, however, 

A useful basis for comparison in light of the above, indeed.

| [Without] *some* appropriate and independently designed and implemented 
| executable schema language [...] you have to catch syntactic problems by 
| checks at the semantic level, which may not be possible; better to catch 
| semantic problems at the syntactical (schema) level as much as possible.


Structural validity as a necessary condition for semantic coherence (from
a practical point of view: i.e. achieving the latter without the former
*could* happen - from non-orthogonality, e.g. - but it's prudent to treat
that as an accident rather than as a designed feature.)


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS