John Cowan <> wrote:
| The RDF/XML syntax is designed to minimize the Hamming distance between
| any fairly well designed data-oriented XML and valid RDF.
An example demonstrating this assertion would be enlightening. Right now,
I'm not sure I understand how "Hamming distance" applies.
All the more so because I don't find any evidence of "design" in RDF/XML
syntax: on the contrary it's all too obvious that some people were in an
inordinate rush to start tossing taggery into Netploder.
When it - naturally, later - came to light that DTDs probably wouldn't
"allow" such happy-go-taggy insouciance, the tack to take became, "Well,
this DTD stuff is no damn good." BTDT.
http://listserv.heanet.ie/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind9508&L=html-wg&P=R14154
| In other words, it maximizes flexibility; there is *always* more than
| one way to do it.
Yes. and that's why I find the claim of maximum flexibility dubious.
