[rdfweb-dev] XSLTs for FOAF, Spring v1.3.1 and plans for FOAF spec improvements

Max Froumentin mf at w3.org
Thu Jun 26 08:38:51 UTC 2003

About (iii),

I like the idea of two profiles, but I wonder if this could not be
generalised to RDF in general. I understand James' point that "people
could argue that FOAF might just as well be a plain XML language.", but
then why not? And why not RDF in general? Would one XML serialisation
of RDF make everybody happy, or would allowing each language to make its
own serialisation be a good thing?

I like my XSLT approach too, and I think it would work for FOAF or
most other RDF languages. However, in one particular case I'm working
on, it is hardly usable. In this case (the extensible multimodal
annotation language, http://www.w3.org/TR/emma) a arbitrary XML
fragment is passed through several processors that add annotations to
it, optionally reading other processors' anotations. These processors
are supposed to be lightweight components and so we can't expect them
to have a full RDF parser (although this is still being argued). So
either we define our subset of RDF/XML serialisation, or we
demonstrate that we can put full RDF in EMMA processors, or we drop

The suspense is killing me.


More information about the foaf-dev mailing list