Graham wrote:
> I don't see how a highly specialized format for a particular task is
> a competitor to or even compatible with what Atom does.
The "highly specialized task" which is performed using the Sitemap
format is providing lists of changed web pages on sites. This is precisely
the function that is performed in many applications of Atom. The only
difference between the target of Sitemap and Atom is that Sitemap works with
web sites that are not blogs and Atom is usually used with web sites that
are blogs. However, the differences between these two kinds of site are
virtually non-existent.
Atom doesn't need to be a "jack of all trades" to handle the job
that Sitemaps handle. It is already quite capable of doing the job. And, as
James Snell points out in an earlier message, collection documents would
handle well the job of providing Sitemap indexes.
It seems quite clear that the Sitemap and Sitemap index formats have
little to offer that isn't already provided by Atom. This obviously leads to
the question of why Google went to the trouble of defining these formats. It
would be real nice if someone from Google could provide a touch of
explanation...
bob wyman
