On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, Aaron Swartz wrote:
> On Monday, July 23, 2001, at 07:01 AM, Andy Powell wrote:
>
> > Note: as I indicate in the document, I am not taking a position on the
> > relative merits of using 'plain' XML vs. RDF/XML. I am acknowledging
> > that, whatever DCMI and W3C say, people are still choosing not
> > to use RDF
> > for their applications.
>
> Sure, that's fine, but that doesn't mean that they can't use a
> well-specified Dublin Core subset of RDF in their applications.
> It'll blend right in! In fact, your document is most of the way
> there, just change the bit about schemes, and the RDF folks and
> the XML folks can live happily together.
Hi Aaron,
I'm not sure I know what you mean by a 'well-specified Dublin Core subset
of RDF'? Do you mean implementing encoding schemes using constructs like
<dc:language>
<dct:RFC1766>
en-GB
</dct:RFC1766>
</dc:language>
rather than
<dc:language scheme="RFC1766">
en-GB
</dc:language>
or something else?
Andy
--
Distributed Systems and Services
UKOLN, University of Bath, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK [log in to unmask]
http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ukoln/staff/a.powell Voice: +44 1225 323933
Resource Discovery Network http://www.rdn.ac.uk/ Fax: +44 1225 826838
|