Re: RDF isn't so hot
Paul Prescod <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.services.ws-arch |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Francis McCabe wrote: > > At the risk of throwing in a wet towel on a flame fest etc. etc. I feel it > is important to raise a few warnings about RDF. > > From a number of different points of view, RDF has serious issues: > > 1. Software Engineering > RDF is `aggressively' untyped; in some ways it is even worse than XML in > this regard which at least has DTDs and XML schemas to assist the process. > RDF is untypeable (sic) and proud of it. This maximizes the impedance gap > between RDF and regular programming languages. Just as XML has XML Schemas, RDF has DAML, with its daml:DataTypeProperty! In general, it is surprising to me that you evaluate RDF separate from its schema languages. * http://www.daml.org/2002/03/tutorial/slide120-0.html -- "When I walk on the floor for the final execution, I'll wear a denim suit. I'll walk in there like Willie Nelson, John Wayne, Will Smith -- Men in Black -- James Brown. Maybe do a Michael Jackson moonwalk." Congressman James Traficant.