[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Issue 11.1.2: URI vs. URN
On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 09:51:04AM +0000, Graham Klyne wrote:
> Hmmm... I find the description of RDF schemas as expressing *grammars* is a
> little odd, but I suppose it's close enough. I do think that RDF would be
> a good choice for the data model used to express device characteristics,
> well suited to dealing with evolving requirements for device description,
> and supported by tools that can help one reason about system configurations
> (see also the work on OWL). (I've done a little work to generate device
> configuration files from RDF.)
I think the key is the naming scheme. By adopting URIs as the naming
system for all the object instances on a device, RDF can naturally
be used. (But I think we would still need quite some XML schema
definitions to describe the structure of complex objects.)
Anyway, since you seem to have concrete experience, I think it would be
nice if you can post a more concrete description of what you are doing
so we all can read and learn.
/js
--
Juergen Schoenwaelder International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/> P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany
--
to unsubscribe send a message to netconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/netconf/>