Re: [office-metadata] RDF: What can we say?

[Patrick Durusau <patrick@durusau.net>]

Bruce,

++1!

I am going to be real interested to see if projects already using RDF 
are going to be more interested in ODF based implementations once they 
offer the enhanced metadata support. My suspicion is the the flexibility 
we have built in will mean that conversions are going to be more 
metadata based than presently.

Hope you are having a great evening!

Patrick

Bruce D'Arcus wrote:

>
> On May 16, 2007, at 7:57 PM, Patrick Durusau wrote:
>
>> Although I would pitch the advantages as far as the document and  its 
>> content more than the broader Semantic Web vision. People who  
>> already know RDF have drunk the cool-aid on that issue and where I  
>> think we need to sell our proposal is to doc heads who really want  
>> more sophisticated metadata in documents.
>
>
> I mean less the semantic web stuff than this basic description of the  
> model:
>
> <http://www.rdfabout.com/intro/#Triples%20of%20knowledge>
>
> The takehome point WRT to ODF is simply that the contraints of the  
> model allow one the flexibility to describe whatever you wish.
>
> A secondary benefit is that after-the-fact it is trivial to merge  
> data from different sources (documents and such).
>
> In short, it's designed for extensibility and mergeability of data.
>
> Bruce
>
>
>
>

-- 
Patrick Durusau
Patrick@Durusau.net
Chair, V1 - Text Processing: Office and Publishing Systems Interface
Co-Editor, ISO 13250, Topic Maps -- Reference Model
Member, Text Encoding Initiative Board of Directors, 2003-2005

Topic Maps: Human, not artificial, intelligence at work!