I did not quite finish the last simplification (I had forgotten to remove a ParseType and a rdf:type). The result should have been
<Feed>
<head>
<title>Example Feed</title>
<link href="http://example.org/"/>
<updated>2003-12-13T18:30:02Z</updated>
<author>
<name>John Doe</name>
</author>
</head>
<entry>
<title>Atom Powered Robots Run Amok</title>
<id href="vemmi://example.org/2003/32397"/>
<updated>2003-12-13T18:30:02Z</updated>
</entry>
</Feed>This exercise should be done with a much larger example, to see what bugs remain in the current spec. The above exercise show the following bugs:
- Feed should probably be capitalized as above
- id should take an href as above instead of the example from the spec "<id>vemmi://example.org/2003/32397</id>"
Things like that are really simple cleaning up exercises, that would in no way change the functionality of Atom, but allow all of the RSS1.0 folk with their experience to declare Atom as their successor format, and Atom to come clean on its extensibility requirement from the charter. The nice thing is that this is done whilst taking on board all the criticism from the RSS2.0 folk. It looks to me that Atom is close to ending the RSS wars. Time to smoke the peace pipe.
Henry Story
On 18 Dec 2004, at 18:21, Henry Story wrote:
<Feed> <head> <title>Example Feed</title> <link href="http://example.org/"/> <updated>2003-12-13T18:30:02Z</updated> <author rdf:ParseType="Resource"> <rdf:type rdf:resource="&atom;Person"/> <name>John Doe</name> </author> </head> <entry> <title>Atom Powered Robots Run Amok</title> <id href="vemmi://example.org/2003/32397"/> <updated>2003-12-13T18:30:02Z</updated> </entry> </Feed>
