Closure on Extensibility & RDF

[Tim Bray <Tim.Bray@xxxxxxx>]

[On behalf of Paul and myself:]

The opinion has been forcefully expressed that Atom should adopt an 
extensibility framework based partly or wholly, directly or indirectly, 
on RDF.  This idea is not unreasonable on the face of it.  Thus, the 
time has now come to put this into a concrete proposal.  Since we've 
talking about it for months, this shouldn't take long.

Would the advocates of this view please, by Monday January 17th, bring 
the WG a proposal for its consideration.  This could take one of these 
forms:

- A Pace proposing extensibility-framework changes to the language of 
the format draft.  (Rob/Joe, any chance of getting that -04 draft I 
know you're working on published Real Soon Now as a basis?)
- A new Internet-Draft that co-exists with the existing Atom drafts 
that describes an extensibility framework.
- Both.

Note that if you do a Pace and it fails to obtain quick consensus, the 
ideas may fall by the wayside; on the other hand, if you do an I-D this 
may find a life of its own and wind its way to RFC-hood even if people 
in the Atom community remain unconvinced that they need it.  Also, work 
on an I-D would be free of the distraction of Paul and I snarling at 
everyone to finish it up and ship it right now :)

On the other hand, if the extensibility framework requires only a few 
simple additions and/or changes to the existing drafts, and there's a 
chance the WG will be OK with them, then that's probably a much better 
way to go.

In any case, we've invested enough time arguing in the abstract.  
Discussions on this subject which are not framed in terms of specific 
language in specific documents will be ruled out of order by the 
co-chairs starting Monday January 17th.

 -Tim