Toby Inkster wrote:
On Thu, 01 Jul 2010 13:05:54 -0400
Kingsley Idehen <[email protected]> wrote:
W3C only officially acknowledges RDF/XML as Markup Language for RDF
Data Model.
I hear this time and time again, but it is not true anymore.
XHTML+RDFa 1.0 became a W3C Recommendation in October 2008. It has the
same publication status as RDF/XML.
You know that and so do I. We aren't the audience with the understanding
etc..
(And as it happens, XHTML+RDFa 1.0 is capable of representing a larger
subset of the RDF data model than RDF/XML is, as it uses CURIEs rather
than QNames. CURIEs are capable of expressing predicate URIs such as
<http://example.com/1> which cannot be expressed as QNames.)
I am sure you know you are preaching to a believer on this one :-)
My critical concern and gripe is that RDF/XML continues to be a source
of confusion re. RDF and Linked Data.
Some interesting links from prior discussions about RDF/XML and RDF problem:
1. https://gist.github.com/221494/e19ca02a9b5a613705d9160ecb49784c67559898
2. http://bnode.org/media/2009/07/08/semantic_web_technology_stack.png
-- great visualization for talking about RDF (its role is crystal clear
with zero conflation or RDF/XML overhang ) .
--
Regards,
Kingsley Idehen
President & CEO
OpenLink Software
Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
