> From: Murray Spork [mailto:]
> Manos Batsis wrote:
> [...]
> > However, if you do manage to do this by injecting custom
> annotations in
> > XSD, it would be like embedding RDF in it (perhaps ending up with
> > something that feels even more awkward and produces even more
> > dependencies on the XSD), which does not provide any benefits.
>
>
> I'm not sure there aren't significant benefits to be gained from
> combining RDF and XML Schemas. There was some talk a while ago on
> rdf-interest I remember about adorning schemas with RDF. I've found a
> paper [1] on this - but it's almost a year old now.
I fully agree that RDF(S) + XSD provides the benefits of both worlds. My
argument was about modularization of an application; under that respect,
I don't believe that combining RDF and XSD (or enhancing XSD to do
something similar) *in the same document or language* provides any
additional benefits against using them separated. Also, I wouldn't want
to be dependent on XSD as a language. I like to have a clean separation
of tasks that enables me to do my work easily and to minimize
dependencies between modules. That way I can have the flexibility of
switching to Relax NG for example, without rewriting the module that
validates my statements/triples.
Cheers,
Manos
