norman.walsh.name: Comments on /2004/07/30/rdfxmlhttp://norman.walsh.name/2004/07/30/rdfxml/comments.atom2012-02-13T06:41:15.414171ZComment 1 on /2004/07/30/rdfxmlhttp://norman.walsh.name/2010/09/25/oauth#comment00012004-07-31T00:08:34Z2004-07-31T00:08:34ZKen MacLeodda39a3ee5e6b4b0d3255bfef95601890afd80709

RSS 1.0 also has a restricted RDF/XML serialization; more due to backward compatibility with RSS 0.9 than for readability, but it was also noted at the time that it improved readability and non-RDF processing.

Comment 2 on /2004/07/30/rdfxmlhttp://norman.walsh.name/2010/09/25/oauth#comment00022004-08-06T13:10:25Z2004-08-06T13:10:25ZJames Tauberda39a3ee5e6b4b0d3255bfef95601890afd80709

Some more thoughts at http://jtauber.com/blog/2004/08/06/more_on_xml_and_rdf

Comment 3 on /2004/07/30/rdfxmlhttp://norman.walsh.name/2010/09/25/oauth#comment00032004-11-04T13:40:22Z2004-11-04T13:40:22ZWilfred Springerda39a3ee5e6b4b0d3255bfef95601890afd80709

I hate to say it, but I have to admit that Norman has a point here. (But let nobody touch my precious RDF >:@) No matter how much I like RDF (and OWL in particular) to add semantics the things I produce, it is definitely a nightmare to write it by hand.

In my attempt to get my head around it, I stumbled into WEESA. Definitely worth reading:

http://server2.tecweb.inf.puc-rio.br/we-sw-2004/www2004-weesa.pdf

Comment 4 on /2004/07/30/rdfxmlhttp://norman.walsh.name/2010/09/25/oauth#comment00042005-09-02T09:05:00Z2005-09-02T09:05:00ZAndy Angielskida39a3ee5e6b4b0d3255bfef95601890afd80709

Hey guys I'm getting a bit off the topic here but I got a little problem :). I've traslated into Polish the W3C spec concering RDF and I would like to get a feedback from someone speaking Polish as to translation accuracy . Click on the Polish version to view it. thx andy