[Tdwg-tag] RDF instead of xml schema

Javier de la Torre jatorre at gmail.com
Sat Mar 25 04:30:44 CET 2006


Just a comment on the GML part.

> RDF technologies are an excellent way to do this.  GML has managed to
> produce many of the same features, but has probably done so largely by
> replicating the essentials of RDF modelling.

I understand that GML has provided standard explicit encodings for  
only some things. These include most of the base things that people  
need to share like geometry, topology, observations,  coordinate  
reference systems, etc.. These items are covered by fixed schema  

In the other hand GML does not want to invent another schema language  
to cover a broader range of application domains, for example,  
biodiversity informatics. For schema definition they have elected (at  
least for the near term) XML Schema.  GML has used other schema  
languages in the past such as DTD and RDF, but it does not  try to  
create another schema language just for  GML.

So, do not consider GML just as a modeling language. It provides a  
framework where application models can be created together with  
geographical stuff using the "most popular" schema language of the  
moment and keep interoperability possible.

I hope this clarify someone.


More information about the tdwg-tag mailing list