From: Dan Brickley (danbri@w3.org)
Date: 11/30/01
On Fri, 30 Nov 2001, Stefan Decker wrote: > Pat, > At 03:46 PM 11/29/2001, Pat Hayes wrote: > >>Peter, > >> > >>thanks for your answer. > >>I'm still not clear if I could represent an interpretation graph > >>in RDF, given the right vocabulary. > > > >My reply would be: suppose you can. So what? Ie what significance would > >you attribute to the ability to describe such a structure in RDF? > > my understanding is, that RDF can serve as a universal data model - thus > representing any structured data. Thus investments in RDF can be > justified by the reusability of the results. So can Unicode, in the sense that any data can be 'represented in it'. Just because some chunk of data can be 'represented in' some format Foo, we can't automatically expect all generic Foo tools to be useful and usable on that chunk of data. Same problem with RDF. The squeezing and distorting that we have to do to get certain forms of content into a flat RDF graph doesn't come without a price. Dan -- mailto:danbri@w3.org http://www.w3.org/People/DanBri/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 04/02/02 EST