On Wed, 06 Dec 2006 07:52:17 +0530, Karl Dubost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Le 6 déc. 2006 à 04:08, Martin Atkins a écrit :
Mike Schinkel wrote:
All really sucessful text formats have been easy to edit (why did
RSS take off while RDF is still struggling to get off the ground?)
>
I don't necessarily disagree with your sentiment, but it could be
argued that RSS has done well while RDF has floundered largely because
RSS solves a real-world problem (how to get news/weblog content into
aggregators) while RDF solves a purely theoretical problem that less
people have a pressing need to solve (A generic representation of
relationships between resources).
just for the record and if you really want to compare things.
RSS 2.0 is an application of XML
RSS 1.0 is an application of RDF/XML
I would characterise it differently. Every wo/man and their blog uses
(some half-arsed borken form of) RSS because it solves trivial little
problems that are faced by zillions of people. RDF has a smaller usage
base, because the problem it solves is interesting to a smaller group.
That said, the more complex problem is where a lot of money is being
spent, and there is significant interest in it from people who are
building businesses beyond the small web-design shop. To say it is
foundering seems to me like suggesting that jet aircraft are foundering
because most people use propellor planes, or cars.
cheers
--
Charles McCathieNevile, Opera Software: Standards Group
hablo español - je parle français - jeg lærer norsk
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Try Opera 9 now! http://opera.com
