Manos Batsis writes:
> RDF has a simple but strict model, meaning the way it's XML is
> de-serialized into triples to form the RDF graph. That's what makes
> RDF processors able of dealing with any RDF. Vanilla XML on the other
> hand is unpredictable in structure (as well as the actual meaning of
> that structure) and levels of depth - from the RDF point of view, XML
> is ugly, low level and meaningless.
Heh. From my markup-centric perspective, RDF is ugly, high-level, and
excessively charged with meaning encoded so abstractly as to be nearly
cryptographic. Oh, and it's painfully constraining since it can't
figure out how to deal with mixed content, a common human construct.
Just couldn't resist...
-------------
Simon St.Laurent - SSL is my TLA
http://simonstl.com may be my URI
http://monasticxml.org may be my ascetic URI
urn:oid:1.3.6.1.4.1.6320 is another possibility altogether
