It looks to me like a good starting point for potential Container systems is to implement as much as possible of the Data Apis in our own sites. yes?
I'm sure we're not alone in having *much* more data available than is defined in the gData namespace. For example the People Data API; I'm very tempted to add FOAF and VCARD namespaces to the Atom data and then use it to expose all the extra data. Looking at this from the gadget writer's point of view this could lead to a proliferation of non-standard data and namespaces. They'll be caught up in a race to code for and understand more and more extensions that might or might not be available when the Gadget is hosted in a specific Container. Let's make this completely clear with a very simple example. Orkut doesn't have a field for Skype ID. Skype ID is not in the GData namespace. But Skype ID is a field or value in many, many social networks. If I'm writing a gadget to show Skype status, is there any standard way to expect the ID to be passed back to me? Is there any standard way for a Container developer to expose the Skype ID? What's Google's view on all this? -- Julian Bond E&MSN: julian_bond at voidstar.com M: +44 (0)77 5907 2173 Webmaster: http://www.ecademy.com/ T: +44 (0)192 0412 433 Personal WebLog: http://www.voidstar.com/ skype:julian.bond?chat *** Just Say No To DRM *** --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenSocial Container Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/opensocial-container?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
