An Introspection document contains a service around workspaces
around collections:
<service...>
<workspace ...>
<collection.../>
</workspace>
</service>
This structure expresses containment, but the data model does not.
Workspaces are not resources (right?). They are attributes
or properties of collections: won't we be happier with expressing
properties as XML attributes rather than containment in elements:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding='utf-8'?>
<service xmlns="http://purl.org/atom/app#";>
<collection
workspace="Main Site"
title="My Blog Entries"
href="http://example.org/reilly/main"; >
<member-type>entry</member-type>
</collection>
<collection
workspace="Main Site"
title="Pictures"
href="http://example.org/reilly/pic"; >
<member-type>media</member-type>
</collection>
</workspace>
</service>
Pro: no-pseudo containment, no implied non-uniform naming (think
workspace/collection is the new C:/windows), less elements, no
lost function (UI can always list collections by workspace), allows
extension to collections of collections in future.
Con: time waits for no standard.
John.
______________________________________________________
John J. Barton email: johnjbarton<at>johnjbarton.com
http://www.johnjbarton.com
