Comments on: Is there fertile ground between RDFa and GRDDL? http://dubinko.info/blog/2007/10/22/is-there-fertile-ground-between-rdfa-and-grddl/ From an XML geek, a reader, a writer, a connector, a man of the people (says keep hope alive) Sat, 01 Oct 2011 16:18:55 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Chimezie http://dubinko.info/blog/2007/10/22/is-there-fertile-ground-between-rdfa-and-grddl/comment-page-1/#comment-3750 Chimezie Tue, 23 Oct 2007 16:00:31 +0000 http://dubinko.info/blog/2007/10/22/is-there-fertile-ground-between-rdfa-and-grddl/#comment-3750 Interesting, Micah. So, if I understand you correctly, are you suggesting that producers can provide an RDF rendition of their XML documents that includes statements that bind prefixes to namespace URIs? And these bindings can be used to expand Curies or QNames independent of the payload? That is an interesting scenario and certainly eases the <a href="http://www.jenitennison.com/blog/node/49">pushback</a> associated with solutions that rely on QNames in content. (perhaps we can talk more about this at XML 2007?) Interesting, Micah. So, if I understand you correctly, are you suggesting that producers can provide an RDF rendition of their XML documents that includes statements that bind prefixes to namespace URIs? And these bindings can be used to expand Curies or QNames independent of the payload? That is an interesting scenario and certainly eases the pushback associated with solutions that rely on QNames in content.

(perhaps we can talk more about this at XML 2007?)

]]>