On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 07:08:37 +0200, Manu Sporny
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
The idea and premise of RDF is sort of attractive (people being able to
do their own thing, unified data model, etc), though I agree with others
that the complexity (lengthy URIs, ***qname***/curie cruft) is an issue.
We do not use QName's in RDFa - there is not QName/CURIE cruft! We went
to great lengths to avoid QNames, please take the time to understand why
(it's because of the cruft that you complain about):
As far as I can tell they both have the same (subset of) problems. They
create a level of indirection and require keeping namespace prefix
declarations around.
--
Anne van Kesteren
<http://annevankesteren.nl/>
<http://www.opera.com/>
