[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
At 23:28 2.11.2003, you wrote:
>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.
Yes, syntax flexibility should be reduced a bit if you take my value-laden
"emotional response"
into account ;-) (btw my resurrected email signature gives two views on
this emotion matter)
I guess XML/RDF's intended machine processable and we don't have to feel
compassion
for machines (yet?), but how about feeling compassion for parser writers
and for people
that must process raw XML/RDF?
Thank you for the links Simon, they shed some light for my RDF path.
Thanks to you Dave too - Spec is well written, it's just the syntax that is
too flexible for my banana brain ;)
Toni Uusitalo
"And I wish that I was made of stone
So that I would not have to see
A beauty impossible to define
A beauty impossible to believe"
- Nick Cave (Brompton Oratory) - romanticist?
"There are lots of myths that people have around issues of beauty and
attraction, and part of the issue is to stop thinking about things in terms
of myth, but to use the tools of neuroscience, and start dissecting and
understanding how things actually function," said Dr. Hans Breiter, a
psychiatrist and co-author of the study."
- The Brain Is Stimulated by Beauty, Study Finds - abcnews.com - scientist?
Toni Uusitalo
"And I wish that I was made of stone
So that I would not have to see
A beauty impossible to define
A beauty impossible to believe"
- Nick Cave (Brompton Oratory) - romanticist?
"There are lots of myths that people have around issues of beauty and
attraction, and part of the issue is to stop thinking about things in terms
of myth, but to use the tools of neuroscience, and start dissecting and
understanding how things actually function," said Dr. Hans Breiter, a
psychiatrist and co-author of the study."
- The Brain Is Stimulated by Beauty, Study Finds - abcnews.com - scientist?
|
