Re: Extensibility in Syndication formats

[Robert Sayre <mint@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Ian Davis wrote:

> I think there's a complexity difference between single element 
> extensions that appear as children of the primary elements (e.g. 
> channel/item/feed/entry) and complex structures such as creative commons 
> where you may want to embed a description of a custom license.

If a given structure is really complex, it probably doesn't belong in a 
syndication feed as metadata. A reference to an external resource would 
be fine [0]. If you really want to include it, there's nothing stopping 
you from using an extension consisting of RDF/XML.

There are a limited number of subjects in an Atom Entry. A 
general-purpose model like RDF seems like total overkill to me. However, 
that's just opinion. We're here to standardize current practice, so 
let's see some examples of complex RDF extensions succeeding in 
syndication. For example, how widely used is the "rich" variant of the 
RSS1.0 DC module?

Robert Sayre

[0] http://backend.userland.com/discuss/msgReader$200