I don't have that much of an opinion now on the head in entry and
various
other proposals.
But I do find your comment that moving something off to an extension
essentially kills it to be a very important remark. This is clearly
to say that Atom has not yet dealt with the extension part of the
And even though many people seem to willing to create fill in language
for that part of the spec to make it seem like this part has been
addressed, your on the ground initial reaction is the correct one:
there is no well defined extension mechanism.
Henry: I suspect that Bob's reaction would
On 5 Feb 2005, at 13:49, Henry Story wrote:
So perhaps what we could do in the next weeks is fill in the work
I started in my proposal AtomAsRDF, that would allow Atom to be
seen as an RDF/XML document, though one constrained by an Relax-NG
syntax.
This will require a week or two of serious group
On 5 Feb 2005, at 20:18, Bob Wyman wrote:
Roger Benningfield wrote:
Henry: I suspect that Bob's reaction would have been the same, no
matter how well-defined the extension mechanism. Anything outside
the core will have spotty (at best) support in aggregators and
publishing tools.
You are
Tim Bray wrote:
I think that the charter requirements on extensibility will be filled
adequately with PaceExtendingAtom. I think they would be filled still
better by adopting PaceMustUnderstandElement, but apparently others are
unconvinced. Extensibility via a mapping to RDF seems to me to
On Jan 8, 2005, at 8:23 AM, Bill de hÓra wrote:
My answer to this question is that Atom doesn't have a model in terms
of being able to talk about extension so there's no point discussing
it. Extensibility is probably out of scope for the format.
I'm not going to let that go unchallenged. The
Bill de hÓra wrote:
Look, the point is this. Those arguing from the RDF side of the house do
mean what you mean by extensible. Furthermore, what is meant there by
Dammit. Sorry, that should be, those arguing from the RDF side of the
house do *not* mean what you mean by extensible.
cheers
Bill
On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 00:18:37 +, Bill de hÓra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Look, the point is this. Those arguing from the RDF side of the house do [not]
mean what you mean by extensible. Furthermore, what is meant there by
extensible hasn't been demonstrated (in my mind) as a requirement for
On Fri, 7 Jan 2005 19:45:43 +0100, Danny Ayers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Given Henry's proposal, the person that uses RSS 2.0 today would
notice no additional complexity. The only people that would need to
know a little about RDF would be those that wish to develop
extensions. All they would
I'm not sure why this discussion has popped up again, but it seems to me
that there will always be people who only can grasp the bits and bytes
that actually go across the wire, and there will be several sets of
people who can only grasp the higher level abstractions that they see
through the
I'd say that the most useful basic features of RDF are:
1) Property names are namespaced for extensibility.
2) Important entities can be assigned global identifiers so that they
can be referred to externally.
3) Statements are properties of an object rather than being simple
name/value
Sam Ruby wrote:
I'm not sure why this discussion has popped up again...
In the case of RDF, there exists a standard means to associate a
document with a mapping. This standard is called GRDDL. [1]
Meanwhile, it would not be harmful to mention this one element or
attribute (anybody have a
On Jan 7, 2005, at 2:38 PM, David Powell wrote:
I think if we ensure that these properties apply to the Atom model,
then it will be beneficial to Atom, and will make any mapping between
Atom and RDF a lot simpler.
Please propose specific edits to current drafts for the WG's
consideration. -Tim
Let me see if I can correctly restate the following in language I'm
familiar with--let me know whether I've got this right or not:
On Friday, January 7, 2005, at 03:38 PM, David Powell wrote:
I'd say that the most useful basic features of RDF are:
1) Property names are namespaced for
14 matches
Mail list logo
