RDF **vs** XML???

[David Megginson]

Didier PH Martin writes:

 > After reading your comments it appeared to me that tacitly you have
 > this model (please correct me if this is wrong, I just guessed it
 > from trying to understand your position)
 > 
 > a) XML DTD based documents are more documents in the classical sense like
 > for instance a report, a book, etc...
 > b) RDF based document are more for data exchange and more particularly for
 > data base data exchange.

No, this is wrong -- my model is that RDF (or something similar, like
XMI) is a layer of abstraction *above* XML, just as an object layer
can be an abstraction above a set of database tables.  I can imagine
similar layers of abstraction that would be useful for more prosaic
(in the literal sense) documents, but both layers have XML in common
underneath.

Saying that RDF is an alternative to XML is like saying that HTTP is
an alternative to IP.


All the best,


David

-- 
David Megginson                 david at megginson.com
           http://www.megginson.com/

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/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
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)