> <!DOCTYPE rdf:RDF [
N.B. That should go at the very top of the file, if at all. I'm not sure
that it's necessary to include the RDF within the file, because I don't
think it serves any purpose there; RDDL is a catalogue format, rather than
a schema collection framework. Without the RDF, you could also use the
proper RDDL DOCTYPE, which would facilitate validation, should anyone want
to do that.
I am very much in favor of the RDDL idea, and of stabilising the PURLs,
BTW. Good idea, and a nice bit of work, Aaron.
--
Kindest Regards,
Sean B. Palmer
@prefix : <http://webns.net/roughterms/> .
:Sean :hasHomepage <http://purl.org/net/sbp/> .
|