David and all, hello.
On 3 Sep 2015, at 22:11, David Booth wrote:
I can appreciate the value of RDF/XML for certain processing tasks,
and I'm okay with keeping RDF/XML alive as a *processing* format. My
suggestion to deprecate RDF/XML was intended to apply to its use as a
*publishing* format.
Hear hear.
For example: When RDFizing data that originated from something XMLish
(or something convenient to process using XML tools), RDF/XML is
obviously by far the most convenient target for generation by XSLT or
similar. But when doing that I always check my work by immediately
converting to Turtle. And having generated it, I might as well serve it
out with suitable ConNeg, because it will probably be the most
convenient format for _someone_.
But there's little need to advertise it, and no need to mention it
prominently when introducing RDF.
All the best,
Norman
--
Norman Gray : http://nxg.me.uk
SUPA School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, UK
