[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Extensibility in Syndication formats
Dan Brickley wrote:
Extensibility comes at a price, and designing something cleaner and
better than RDF will be an interesting endeavour. Finding a clean and
syntactically graceful way of mapping _into_ RDF also comes at a price,
as does (of course) simply using full RDF/XML syntax. The pre-IETF
Atom community decided some time ago that they didn't find RDF/XML
an attractive proposition, which I guess means we're going the route of
defining an extensibility model that is somehow better than RSS 1.0's.
If you were to express that paragraph as a set of assertions, you would
find something missing. I'm going to extract a few, please forgive my
inprecise way of expressing them:
RSS 1.0 uses RDF.
RDF addresses some extensibility problems.
RDF/XML is a serialization syntax for RDF.
pre-IETF community didn't find the RDF/XML syntax attractive.
What can we conclude from this?
First, for purposes of this discussion, lets not debate the assertion
that RDF addresses extensibility issues, and simply treat it as a given.
And let's assume, again for purposes of discussion, that the AtomPub
working group is interested in pursing a non-RDF/XML serialization syntax.
Even with all these assumptions, can we conclude that "we're going the
route of defining an extensibility model that is somehow better than RSS
I don't think so.
Hint: there are other serialization syntaxes than RDF/XML.
- Sam Ruby