[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Ben Trafford wrote:
>You're proposing we say, "Look, you want links? Well, first write yourself
>a DTD. Then a stylesheet. Oh, and by the way, you'll need to write an RDF
>vocabularly to represent the data relationships, too. Hope you like
colons!"
Looks like we've got two threads going. I never said any of that, but
interestingly I did agree with you in the other thread that stylesheets have
a lot of value. All I said was that RDF provides a way to say that resource
X has relationship Y to resource Z. We don't need DTDs, stylesheets or
especially new RDF vocabularies to express such a relationship statement.
We do need a usable RDF syntax. Of the various alternatives, I certainly
won't defend RDF/XML, and I look forward to the results of the current work
on expressing RDF in XHTML. I guess my ultimate opinion is that we should
wait and see how that works out before starting any new W3C linking
standards or trying to rewrite XLink.
Bob
|
