The RDF Dump (or at least the provided example) seems to adhere to some very old draft specification of RDF/XML. Are there plans to fix it to adhere to the final spec so that it can be read by standards RDF processors?
The main problems seem to be a wrong namespace, the unqualified use of rdf:about and a missing namespace prefix on the root element (which thus appears in the dmoz-ns rather than rdf).
Cheers,
Reto
References
W3C validators result with DMOZ example content: http : // www . w3 . org/RDF/Validator/ARPServlet?URI=http%3A%2F%2Frdf.dmoz.org%2Frdf%2Fcontent.example.txt&PARSE=Parse+URI%3A+&TRIPLES_AND_GRAPH=PRINT_TRIPLES&FORMAT=PNG_EMBED
RDF/XML Syntax specification:
http : // www . w3 . org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar/
The main problems seem to be a wrong namespace, the unqualified use of rdf:about and a missing namespace prefix on the root element (which thus appears in the dmoz-ns rather than rdf).
Cheers,
Reto
References
W3C validators result with DMOZ example content: http : // www . w3 . org/RDF/Validator/ARPServlet?URI=http%3A%2F%2Frdf.dmoz.org%2Frdf%2Fcontent.example.txt&PARSE=Parse+URI%3A+&TRIPLES_AND_GRAPH=PRINT_TRIPLES&FORMAT=PNG_EMBED
RDF/XML Syntax specification:
http : // www . w3 . org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar/