XSchema Question 1: RDF

Don Park donpark at quake.net
Sat May 30 03:21:46 BST 1998

I would recommend that we stay clear of RDF for now for three reasons:

First, RDF is a much more complex specification which is still being
defined.  Unless we can identify a simple and stable subset of RDF to base
XSchema on, we will end up requiring all XSchema-compliant tools to be
RDF-compliant as well.

Second, we will be moving much faster than RDF effort and we need as much
room as possible away from any large slow moving body like RDF.

Three, I do not fully understand RDF.  The spec starts off simple and
elegant but ends up complicated and artificial.  No offense to RDF WG.  It
usually happens when a concept is too useful.


Don Park

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)

More information about the Xml-dev mailing list