[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: visibility/privacy extensions
* Erling Wegger Linde <erlingwl@xxxxxxxxx> [2008-06-16 23:15]:
> Why not use RDF? Isn't RDF more general?
Yes, which makes it more demanding to process properly. If Atom
was specified in terms of RDF, you can bet that the same thing
would happen as it did with RSS 1.0: aggregators would parse the
RDF as XML, instead of building a graph out of it, and would
therefore break if anyone actually used Atom as RDF, eg. changing
the precise XML serialisation or adding triples in unexpected
As I found out when I changed the namespace prefix bindings in my
feed, even just using Atom as actual XML will break a whole bunch
of naïve Atom parsers!
I don’t like this reality, but reality has a way of not caring
about whether I like it or not…
> Could these categories be used anywhere outside of Atom?
Not as it’s written.
> I'm not very familiar with the atom:category(ies) so I ask: can
> atom:categories be referred to / used in a meaningful way with
An atom:category is basically a rudimentary shorthand for writing
an RDF triple (where the Entry is always the subject).
> Why not try to use RDF when you can, not try to avoid it?
Note that there’s nothing stopping anyone from GRDDLing Atom (or
otherwise creating a mapping), and there are community efforts
underway, eg. http://djpowell.net/blog/entries/Atom-RDF.html
Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>