Re: atom:category@scheme

[Geoffrey Sneddon <foolistbar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 3 May 2007, at 18:27, Sylvain Hellegouarch wrote:

> Geoffrey Sneddon wrote:
> > On 2 May 2007, at 16:53, James M Snell wrote:
> >
> > > The meaning is application dependent.  For instance, Lotus  
> > > Connections
> > > uses a category scheme value "http://www.ibm.com/xmlns/prod/sn/ 
> > > type",
> > > which when used with a set of specific terms (e.g. "message",
> > > "bookmark", "chat", etc) has a very specific meaning in the Lotus
> > > Connections product.
> >
> > If it's application specific, I assume the attribute itself has no
> > semantics. I fail to see how this is useful for aggregators  
> > whatsoever,
> > as its content could mean almost anything. Application specific  
> > things
> > should probably be left to namespaces where attributes can be defined
> > with actual semantics.
>
> It may be worthless to aggregators but a powerful attribute for
> applications that are built atop APP. Imagines a CMS that uses APP to
> perform its operations, the scheme could denote different meaning  
> within
> the context of the CMS.
>
> You could also imagine an automated service that "converses" with  
> an APP
> service. This automation could give a specific meaning to the scheme
> attribute again.
>
> APP goes way beyond the aggregators-space.

Surely it would therefore be defined in APP then, not the syndication  
format?


- Geoffrey Sneddon