Thanks, Flip.
I agree that we should as far as we can start with data models which are defined independently of the encoding. The key factor is to move towards a cleaner object-oriented model (with well-defined objects and relationships) and then we should be able to play with different encodings much more easily than today.
Best wishes,
Donald
--------------------------------------------------------------- Donald Hobern (dhobern@gbif.org) Programme Officer for Data Access and Database Interoperability Global Biodiversity Information Facility Secretariat Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen, Denmark Tel: +45-35321483 Mobile: +45-28751483 Fax: +45-35321480 ---------------------------------------------------------------
-----Original Message----- From: Tdwg-tag-bounces@lists.tdwg.org [mailto:Tdwg-tag-bounces@lists.tdwg.org] On Behalf Of Phillip C.Dibner Sent: 24 March 2006 20:53 To: G. Hagedorn Cc: Tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org Subject: Re: [Tdwg-tag] RDF instead of xml schema
I can contribute a few answers:
- Would we be first in line to try rdf for such complex models as
biodiversity informatics?
I think there's no harm, and likely some benefit, to experimentation. However, I believe our models need to be specified in some way that is (as) independent (as possible) of serialization / encoding.
This of course completely avoids the question of what we should use as a practical matter for communications and online schemas. In that department, I would tend to go with XML Schema until standard RDF encodings have been developed for models upon which we (are likely to) depend. Mixed implementations might also be appropriate and manageable in some cases.
- Why are GML, SVG etc. based on xml schema and not RDFS? Is this just
historical?
In the case of GML, I guess you could say it's historical. An early version of GML was actually coded in RDF, and GML implicitly incorporates some of the same semantic notions as RDF. XML Schema has been used since then for formal specifications because when it was created, RDF and the tools that support it were not sufficiently mature. There is somewhat of a movement now to develop RDF serializations, but I'm not aware of any formal projects.
Flip
Phillip C. Dibner Ecosystem Associates (650) 948-3537 (650) 948-7895 Fax
_______________________________________________ Tdwg-tag mailing list Tdwg-tag@lists.tdwg.org http://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-tag_lists.tdwg.org