On Tue, 2009-05-19 at 00:55 -0700, Peter Ansell wrote: > Do you know what triples you are trying to get out using your > unconventional (yet seemingly valid) RDF/XML? Why don't you try more > traditional RDF/XML that is simpler to comprehend? Do you have control > of the program that generated the unconventional RDF/XML?
Yes, I know that is an ugly serialization, but it comes from another tools which I don't have control on. > Did you know that your document encoded the same RDF Triples as the document > above? That the proble, it doesn't load the second rdf:type triple. Although it's ugly, it's valid, so it must be supported by the parser, that's why I reported it. In this concrete case I fixed it putting a pipe with a 2-lines python script re-serializing it as pretty xml. > Also, why do you need to say that something is an Agent and a Person > when Person is a subclass of Agent? That was just an example, its content is not so impotant. Best, -- Sergio Fernández - sergio.fernan...@fundacionctic.org R&D Deparment CTIC Foundation - www.fundacionctic.org Phone: +34 984 29 12 12 Fax: +34 984 39 06 12 Edificio Centros Tecnológicos Parque Científico Tecnológico 33203 Cabueñes - Gijón - Asturias - Spain
