[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk (Dave Beckett) writes:
>Yes, the RDF/XML syntax has too many abbreviated forms.
>So the obvious answer is to not use them all.
>
>Personally I'd say there is no need to use property
>attributes - stick with just property elements form. It's got other
>advantages too, such as being able to write down human languages
>(xml:lang) and datatypes (rdf:datatype) on the property elements.
Fair enough, if you're the person creating/writing/serializing RDF. If
you're the person receiving RDF (specified as RDF, not through an XML
schema), you just get stuck processing whatever showed up.
My FOAF-in-XML work seemed fine reasonably simple I hit Bill Kearney's
file, which deliberately used far more of the syntax options than most
people had chosen.
It might be a good idea to define at least one reduced syntax - property
elements form sounds reasonable - so that people who don't want to
accept all the options don't have to.
|
