I’ve always been a proponent of RDF in reasonable circs: i.e. in closed systems where authorities are clear. But ocasionally I come across the usage that makes me wonder whether it is madness, genius, or both.
The idea of encoding e-mail messages in XML is not new. Several years ago, Jonathan Borden developed XML Mail Transport Protocol (XMTP) for representation of RFC 822 and MIME in XML. I thouht Jonathan might have also experimented with an RDF variation on this, but the relevant Web page is down right now, so I’m not sure.
Graham Klyne’s Interet Draft is much more comprehensive than XMTP. Though it’s in RDF/XML, it tries to keep the RDFisms as disceet as possible. Nevertheless, the question is whether the following works for an XML e-mail representation:
<emx:Message xmlns:emx='URN:ietf:params:email-xml:' xmlns:rfc822='URN:ietf:params:rfc822:'> <rfc822:from> <emx:Address> <emx:adrs>mailto:Christopher.Robin@GreenDoor.org</emx:adrs> <emx:name>Christopher Robin</emx:name> </emx:Address> </rfc822:from> <rfc822:to> <emx:Address> <emx:adrs>mailto:Pooh@PoohCorner.100Aker.org</emx:adrs> <emx:name>Winnie the Pooh</emx:name> </emx:Address> </rfc822:to> <rfc822:subject>Re: Woozle hunting</rfc822:subject> <emx:content type='text/plain'> You're the Best Bear in All the World </emx:content> </emx:Message>
I’ll have to chew on it a bit to decide. “It’s too verbose” comments ae too facile: remember that the aim here is more machine accessibility than human readibility.