On 8/21/2017 10:44 AM, Kurt Cagle wrote:
> Tom,
>
> You don't NEED RDF but it can be a useful tool nonetheless.
Well, sure, I'm not saying otherwise, but there are lots of conventions
(you can regard RDF-XML as a convention!) that do things that *can* be
done with plain XML.
TomP
> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 9:41 AM, Thomas Passin <
> <mailto:>> wrote:
>
> On 8/21/2017 2:22 AM, Ghislain Fourny wrote:
>
> I agree with this statement, but I would add that it is very
> important to distinguish between the core data models of XML
> (infoset, PSVI, XDM) and other data models it is able to support
> indirectly.
>
> XML primarily -- natively -- has a tree-based data model.
>
> It can store graphs, but doing so requires an extra data model such
> as RDF or XBRL linkbases (which massively use XLink), and such data
> models are not specifically bound or restricted to XML syntax.
>
>
> ID/IDREF can be used for graphs... a native facility. You don't
> really need RDF, etc.
>
> TomP
>
