Sounds about right to me. How about coversion? Any value to the ability to switch between a ROME generic feed object & an Abdera feed object? Or would you just go from ROME -> atom xml string -> Abdera & vice versa? If there was value to doing it by object, where might such code live?
-Stephen On 6/9/06, Garrett Rooney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 6/8/06, Stephen Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This was brought up on the ROME mailing lists: > https://rome.dev.java.net/servlets/ReadMsg?list=dev&msgNo=1985 > > However, I'd like to hear thoughts on it from the Abdera community > point of view. What pieces of ROME are in scope for the Abdera > project? Is conversion either to or from other syndication formats > something that might be a module in Abdera? How about support for > feed extensions such as GData, SSE, iTunes, etc? > > Any other generic ideas on a vision for collaboration with ROME? The > differing goals & scopes and all the options for cooperation seem to > make it difficult to get down to concrete ideas on what kind of code > should go where. Certainly I'd hate to see too much duplication > though... Personally, I'd like to keep Abdera focussed on Atom and extensions that work with Atom. So GData, SSE, iTunes are all fine, but I have no interest in expanding into other formats (any of the RSS family, for example) or protocols (the metaweblog APIs, for example). As far as collaboration with Rome, I think it'd be fantastic if Rome decided to use the Abdera parser for their Atom support, but I'm less interested in merging the two projects since it seems like Rome has a much larger scope than Abdera does. All just inmy opinion of course, -garrett
-- Stephen Duncan Jr www.stephenduncanjr.com
