Ugh. Not more discussion about the introspection document!! ;-) The current format provides a structural grouping that just works.
- James John J. Barton wrote: > > 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 > >
