[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:
> At 4:42 PM +0100 6/9/04, Bill de hÓra wrote:
>
>
>> The problem with your position is that you're doing something along
>> the lines of comparing Lisp to Sexprs and asking, what does Lisp buy
>> me? You're not taking in account the code that needs to impute
>> meaning into the Sexpr in the absence of a Lisp evaluator.
This confuses me. LISP (LIst Processor) *is* the interpreter that
interprets s-expressions (AFAIK).
>
> Let's run with that analogy for a minute. If I were claiming Lisp and
> S-exprs were equivalent, you could show me some Lisp programs that
> could not be written as S-exprs without also writing an S-expr
> interpreter.
Of course Lisp programs are always written as s-expressions (modulo
some parser that parses something else into s-expressions).
> I want to see the RDF programs that could not equally easily be
> written with plain XML.
"RDF program" I'm not sure how to interpret this. RDF is a *format* for
interpreting triples as a graph (very basically).
> So far I've only heard it claimed that these exist, but I haven't been
> able to get anybody to produce one. In fact, the few cases I have
> looked at deeply turned out to be based on plain XML and not RDF at
> all! If this stuff is really practical, it shouldn't be that hard to
> come up with an existence proof.
>
>
I am quite sure that I can express *any* RDF as XML -- even if I didn't
use RDF/XML, I could easily express any triple format using some type
of XML wrapper. What am I missing?
Jonathan
|
