Murray Spork:
>  Agreed - something like the SAF 
>  http://www.tibco.com/products/extensibility/saf/exec-summary/

Exactly, that's what we use.

>  > How come you don't see significant benefits in this? 
>  
>  Sorry - poor use of english on my part - my current thinking is that 
>  there are indeed significant benefits to be obtained by this approach.

OK, in that case I agree!

>  As you and the DSTC article have pointed out, there is 
>  overlap between 
>  RDF and Schema - so how do you demarcate between the 2? The 
>  dstc article 
>  proposes a set of guidelines to follow so that overlap or 
>  duplication of 
>  semantic information does not occur (which whilst being a 
>  more immediate 
>  solution; I don't feel it is ideal). The other approach is 
>  the one you 
>  suggest here - a hybrid parser. The DSTC article raised this 
>  possibility 
>  as well. You'll still get conflicts - but maybe they can be managed?

So in the end, at least one person agrees with me. It's nice to know you're
out there! :-)

Matt

-----------------------------------------------------------------
The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org> , an
initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> 

The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/

To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>