Re: [xml-dev] RDDL/RDF - no RDF tax?

From
Mike Champion <>
To
Date
2002-11-17T16:41:24Z
ID
<oprf0lzak6ezizxn@localhost>
Thread
Re: [xml-dev] RDDL/RDF - no RDF tax?
On Sun, 17 Nov 2002 11:00:40 -0500, Jonathan Borden <> 
 wrote:

>
> <rddl:resource ID="XSD">
> <rddl:title>XML Schema</rddl:title>
> <rddl:nature resource="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"/>
> <rddl:purpose
> resource="http://www.rddl.org/purposes#schema-validation"/>
> <rddl:related resource="http://example.org/L.xsd"/>
> <rddl:prose>
> <p>An XML Schema for the L language .</p>
> </rddl:prose>
> </rddl:resource>
>
> hopefully the above XML is self explanatory -- in which case this is 
> human
> readable! I think it is more readable than the XLink version.

That's very human readable ... but RDF-challenged as I am, I don't
understand how it uses RDF.  Where is all the cruft that people complain 
about? :-)

Would a "native" RDF processor understand the assertions in there, or would
a RDDL->RDF filter be needed?