XML [SCL] Issues and proposals (details)

[Christopher Menzel]

On Wednesday, January 15, 2003, at 11:20 AM, Tanel Tammet wrote:

> Since the XML & RDF issues seemed to heat up - sort of -
> I'd again stress some points for having an XML language
> for SCL, different from RDF.

I would definitely agree with this, though it seems to me there is no 
need to argue the point beyond the fact that the expressive power of 
RDF, though presumably adequate for its intended role in the Semantic 
Web, is very limited compared to full FOL.  Hence it is clear that it 
will not do as an XML'ish manifestation of SCL -- though it will be 
wise to carve out that portion of SCL that corresponds exactly to RDF 
in expressiveness.

> This does not mean avoiding
> RDF, quite the opposite: IMHO a "semantic translation"
> should be into RDF, not SCL-XML.

But how is that possible given RDF's expressive limitations, Tanel?  
Perhaps I am not understanding what you mean by a "semantic 
translation".

Regards,

-chris

-- 

  /\ ASCII ribbon | Chris Menzel -- http://philebus.tamu.edu/~cmenzel
  \/   campaign   | Philosophy Dept, Texas A&M University
  /\   against    | College Station, TX 77843-4237
/  \ HTML email  | voice: 979.845-5660  fax: 979.845.0458