On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 11:12 +0100, Damon Chaplin wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-04-28 at 09:02 +0100, Steve Harris wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 27, 2006 at 01:14:09PM +0200, Luis Garrido wrote:
> > > The RDF stuff is looking more and more arcane and hairy with each
> > > iteration, with all those colons, periods and quotes, plus some
> > > SQL'ish for good measure. Human readable? I begin to miss the
> > > syntactic simplicity of only using angled brackets in XML. Sigh, not
> > > another syntax to learn, please.
> >
> > XML doesn't offer the features we need. If we define an XML schema for
> > LADSPA2 descriptions, and someone extends it, you can bet your bottom
> > dollar that it will break 90% of the parsers in some exciting way.
>
> But RDF can be written in XML, so it must have the features, mustn't it?
>
> I just find it very hard to believe that audio plugins are that special.
> Everyone else seems to manage fine with XML.
Google around the 'net for some examples of the same data in RDF/XML
versus Turtle. You'll change your mind real quick. ;)
-DR-
Received on Sat Apr 29 00:15:09 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Apr 29 2006 - 00:15:09 EEST