Aaron Swartz wrote:
>
> On Monday, July 23, 2001, at 11:09 AM, Andy Powell wrote:
>
> > 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 [...]
>
> Yes, I do. That way RDF parsers can parse the stuff, and we
> don't keep them out of the game.
I think this is *very* important. Although more powerful, there
may be good reasons to use XML instead of RDF (complexity, available
software etc.).
However, there should be one requirement for every XML
representation (defined by a DTD or XML Schema or
whatever): it should be valid RDF. This is only a slightly
constrain for the XML representation but of great value
for interoperablilty.
Best regards,
Stefan
|