John, (01)
While reading <http://www.jfsowa.com/talks/kdptut.pdf> I noticed that
you still refer to RDF as being XML specific i.e., the RDF/XML views of
things. Of course, that was true circa. 2004 [1], but no longer the case
today [2]. (02)
Is there any chance that you can accept this important change to RDF
i.e., reflect the decoupled nature of RDF (expressed in RDF 1.1) in the
talk I referred to above? (03)
Links: (04)
1. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/ -- circa. 2004 Concepts & Abstract
Syntax guide which does say "XML based Syntax" which we all know lead to
massive confusion
2. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/ -- current RDF 1.1. Concepts &
Abstract Syntax guide. (05)
-- (06)
Regards, (07)
Kingsley Idehen
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen (08)
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J (01)
|