• No, but someone is very welcome to develop one! BioPAX is described in OWL, which is an extension to RDF. Both RDF and OWL are standard types of XML, but there are three main differences between OWL/RDF and classical XML (DTD and XML Schema-based). • 1. RDF is a network (graph) by default while typical XML is hierarchical by default. The RDF graph is tied together by RDF IDs e.g. . You define a protein once, assign it a unique RDF ID within the document and reference it every time you use it. In XML, by default you would define the protein again each time you use it. The tradeoff is that RDF is maximally non-redundant by default, while XML is maximally redundant by default and RDF is thus more difficult to read and edit while is XML easier to read and edit. Any XML Schema for RDF must take into account the RDF ID attribute on most elements, which is relatively easy. • 2. OWL/RDF does not require an order for its elements while XML Schema does. Any XML S
