Re: The Atomic age
Tim Bray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Paul assures me that the remaining IETF process steps will not introduce material technical changes, and so format-10 is appropriate as a basis for implementors to go to work. Excellent! So, implementors... to work. Just to show willing: http://www.ticketswitch.com/cgi-bin/atom_feed.exe Peter
Re: The Atomic age
Henry Story wrote: Is the mixed format case really possible? Last time I looked there were problems, such as different tags using attributes with the same name but with different semantics. I thought we were close last time I looked, but not quite there. It seems feasible for a somewhat constrained subset, on first investigation. Dan
Re: The Atomic age
Quoting Tim Bray [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Paul assures me that the remaining IETF process steps will not introduce material technical changes, and so format-10 is appropriate as a basis for implementors to go to work. So, implementors... to work. And everyone, now is a good time to tell the world. -Tim Yay! (Except for the namespace that is. Ouch!) -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/
Re: The Atomic age
On Fri, 15 Jul 2005 10:32:29 +0200, Anne van Kesteren [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yay! I second this yay. Yay! (Except for the namespace that is. Ouch!) Yea, that was a bit awkward. The format has a couple of other minor flaws as well, but nothing worth fighting for and nothing serious at all. This is a good specification, all in all. -- Asbjørn Ulsberg «He's a loathsome offensive brute, yet I can't look away»
Re: The Atomic age
--On July 14, 2005 11:37:05 PM -0700 Tim Bray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, implementors... to work. Do we have a list of who is implementing it? That could be used in the Deployment section of http://www.tbray.org/atom/RSS-and-Atom. Ultraseek will implement Atom. We need to think more about exactly what it means for a search engine to implement it, but we'll at least spider it. wunder Creature with the Atom Brain, why is he acting so strange? Roky Erickson -- Walter Underwood Principal Architect, Verity
Re: The Atomic age
On Jul 15, 2005, at 8:56 AM, Walter Underwood wrote: --On July 14, 2005 11:37:05 PM -0700 Tim Bray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, implementors... to work. Do we have a list of who is implementing it? That could be used in the Deployment section of http://www.tbray.org/atom/RSS-and-Atom. Good idea. Ultraseek will implement Atom. We need to think more about exactly what it means for a search engine to implement it, but we'll at least spider it. Want to write a few words in web-space somewhere, Walter, and we can put that in the Wiki? -Tim
Re: The Atomic age
Congrats All! I'll be updating my personal blog feed to Atom 1.0 shortly. I've already updated my IBM internal blog feed to Atom 1.0. Took less than five minutes to update from 0.3 to 1.0. Tim Bray wrote: Paul assures me that the remaining IETF process steps will not introduce material technical changes, and so format-10 is appropriate as a basis for implementors to go to work. So, implementors... to work. And everyone, now is a good time to tell the world. -Tim
Re: The Atomic age
It would be easy to add atom to BlogEd, though I really would like the link rel=ext;next href=http://bblfish.net/blog/archive. 10.atom to be agreed upon. This would allow me to place all the blog content in an archive. It would of course also be useful to have the namespace. Henry On 15 Jul 2005, at 17:56, Walter Underwood wrote: --On July 14, 2005 11:37:05 PM -0700 Tim Bray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, implementors... to work. Do we have a list of who is implementing it? That could be used in the Deployment section of http://www.tbray.org/atom/RSS-and-Atom. Ultraseek will implement Atom. We need to think more about exactly what it means for a search engine to implement it, but we'll at least spider it. wunder Creature with the Atom Brain, why is he acting so strange? Roky Erickson -- Walter Underwood Principal Architect, Verity
Re: The Atomic age
Absolutely. Robert Sayre On 7/15/05, Henry Story [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry. It looks like there is a final namespace: http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom Is that correct? Henry On 15 Jul 2005, at 20:06, Henry Story wrote: It would be easy to add atom to BlogEd, though I really would like the link rel=ext;next href=http://bblfish.net/blog/archive. 10.atom to be agreed upon. This would allow me to place all the blog content in an archive. It would of course also be useful to have the namespace. Henry On 15 Jul 2005, at 17:56, Walter Underwood wrote: --On July 14, 2005 11:37:05 PM -0700 Tim Bray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, implementors... to work. Do we have a list of who is implementing it? That could be used in the Deployment section of http://www.tbray.org/atom/RSS-and-Atom. Ultraseek will implement Atom. We need to think more about exactly what it means for a search engine to implement it, but we'll at least spider it. wunder Creature with the Atom Brain, why is he acting so strange? Roky Erickson -- Walter Underwood Principal Architect, Verity
Re: The Atomic age
On 15 Jul 2005, at 4:56 pm, Walter Underwood wrote: Do we have a list of who is implementing it? That could be used in the Deployment section of http://www.tbray.org/atom/RSS-and-Atom. My blog has one here: http://www.fondantfancies.com/blog/atom1/ I think it's valid, though it's hard to tell without a validator or even a parser. I'm currently rewriting the engine of Shrook to be compatible too. (You may also notice I'm doing my little bit to make sure atom:id is implemented properly) Graham Parks
Re: The Atomic age
http://feedvalidator.org/check.cgi?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fondantfancies.com%2Fblog%2Fatom1%2F :) Robert Sayre On 7/15/05, Graham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 15 Jul 2005, at 4:56 pm, Walter Underwood wrote: Do we have a list of who is implementing it? That could be used in the Deployment section of http://www.tbray.org/atom/RSS-and-Atom. My blog has one here: http://www.fondantfancies.com/blog/atom1/ I think it's valid, though it's hard to tell without a validator or even a parser. I'm currently rewriting the engine of Shrook to be compatible too. (You may also notice I'm doing my little bit to make sure atom:id is implemented properly) Graham Parks
Re: The Atomic age
On Jul 15, 2005, at 12:35 PM, Robert Sayre wrote: http://feedvalidator.org/check.cgi?url=http%3A%2F% 2Fwww.fondantfancies.com%2Fblog%2Fatom1%2F Hmm... the feed looks OK to me; I wouldn't be surprised if it's tickling a bug in the just-barely-into-beta Atom 1.0 feedvalidator code. -Tim :) Robert Sayre On 7/15/05, Graham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 15 Jul 2005, at 4:56 pm, Walter Underwood wrote: Do we have a list of who is implementing it? That could be used in the Deployment section of http://www.tbray.org/atom/RSS-and- Atom. My blog has one here: http://www.fondantfancies.com/blog/atom1/ I think it's valid, though it's hard to tell without a validator or even a parser. I'm currently rewriting the engine of Shrook to be compatible too. (You may also notice I'm doing my little bit to make sure atom:id is implemented properly) Graham Parks
Re: The Atomic age
* Dan Brickley wrote: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/HTML/samples/atom/a1.xml `Content-Type: text/xml; qs=0.9`. Hurray... -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Weinh. Str. 22 · Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 68309 Mannheim · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/
Re: The Atomic age
Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: * Dan Brickley wrote: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/HTML/samples/atom/a1.xml `Content-Type: text/xml; qs=0.9`. Hurray... I could fix that... question is, to what? :) The Atom spec says Atom docs are identified using the Atom media type, but I don't see anything like a 'SHOULD NOT' regarding serving them with other types. In the mixed-format case of an instance being both valid RDF, and valid Atom, we get into pragmatics. RDF tools wouldn't know it was RDF/XML since Atom doesn't allow a toplevel rdf:RDF wrapper element as foreign markup. But Atom tools also have a claim on the content type. Maybe it could be content-negotiable? Something for everybody...? Dan
Re: The Atomic age
Sjoerd Visscher wrote: Dan Brickley wrote: Let me emphasise that I'm not claiming these Atom docs are reasonably interpreted as RDF. Just that they seem to, by happy coincidence as it were, at least share a syntax with RDF. The intepretation of this syntactic state of affairs is up for discussion. I've never understood what makes hybrid RDF/other xml formats appealing. A simple xslt conversion turnes the xml format (the whole format, not a subset) in much better RDF, with no compromises. It might well be that the XSLT/GRDDL approach is best. It depends what you're using Atom for. Lots of Atom constructs use an abc def=...ghi/abc idiom, which won't parse as RDF. For more data-oriented feeds (non-blog stuff, eg. job listings, ecommerce, events, maps etc) much more of the payload will live in extensions anyhow, and using minimal Atom (per my example) might mean the hybrid style finds a niche. For the XSLT/GRDDL case, we'd still need to agree quite which triples to generate, eg. whether to use the same namespace as 'normal' Atom, so there are some details to work out. cheers, Dan
Re: The Atomic age
On Friday, July 15, 2005, at 09:56 AM, Walter Underwood wrote: --On July 14, 2005 11:37:05 PM -0700 Tim Bray [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So, implementors... to work. Do we have a list of who is implementing it? That could be used in the Deployment section of http://www.tbray.org/atom/RSS-and-Atom. I've update Grouper (http://www.geckotribe.com/rss/grouper/) to support conversion of Atom 1.0 to RSS 2.0. A future version will support going the other way...when I get time to complete the major overhaul that will be required to do that. Antone
