[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [syndication] You just knew it would be RDF
> >And folks, I think we've struck oil! One <link> header, where available,
> >pointing to an RDF file that hosts the full set of metadata
> about the site in
> >question. Back that up with a comment pointer in robots.txt for
> the sites
> >where the admins work in restraints.
Yep, indeed, this looks very close to what we need.
On Julian's points:
re. target (channel) format types - I don't think we need a list anywhere,
if the agent doesn't understand the format it doesn't matter if it's on a
list or not.
But I can see the value in explicitly telling the agent what to expect. As
you suggest, a namespace would be the logical approach. Most formats we're
likely to see do have an XML namespace - those that don't can be referenced
by referring to the spec URI.
I can't remember offhand an appropriate element name (RDF class) in any
existing vocabulary, but I'd be surprised if there wasn't one. To get your 3
requirements (URI, title, type) perhaps it could be like this:
<feeds>
<rss:channel rdf:ID="aa"
rdf:resource="http://somesite.aa.example.com/index.rdf";
dc:title="A Glorious Feed"
xxx:format="http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss"; />
...
</feeds>
re. XML or RDF - in a blog post [1] (key stuff quoted below), Mark Baker
points out that we can all have our cake and eat it. I think Bill's example
[2] lightly tweaked could satisfy everyone.
Cheers,
Danny.
[1] http://www.markbaker.ca/2002/09/Blog/2003/10/10#2003-10-rdf-and-xml
[2] http://www.syndic8.com/~wkearney/archives/000251.html
[[
Consider the following. Is it XML or RDF?
<Person xmlns="http://example.org/foofoo/";>
<name>Mark Smith<Mark>
<age>55<age>
<Person>
Answer? It's both. Depending upon which media type it's described with, it
means different things.
To an XML application that isn't hardcoded to know about that language, it's
an almost entirely opaque blob, except for the namespace.
To an RDF application that isn't hardcoded to know about that language, it
knows what the XML app knows, plus:
* that there exists a resource of type "http://example.org/foofoo/Person";
someplace, with properties "http://example.org/foofoo/name"; and
"http://example.org/foofoo/age"; with those values
* that additional properties can be added without impacting the meaning of
the former interpretation (an XML app can't assume this - it might be
breaking its validity against some schema someplace)
* various other possible syntactic additions or modifications which can be
used to extend the current semantics, not change it, if desired.
This is the value of partial understanding.
]]
> Looking at Bill's example reminds me that I really want exactly 3 and no
> more than 3 bits of information about the files pointed to by this
> metadata file.
> - href location
> - plain text title
> - type
>
> We can already say the following in formats that are already well
> understood:-
> <rdfs:seeAlso rdf:resource="http://foo.com/bar.rdf"; dc:title="The Foo
> RSS 2.0 feed" />
>
> and in html
>
> <link rel="alternate" type="something" href="http://foo.com/bar.rdf";
> title="The Foo RSS 2.0 feed" />
>
> So there's really only one thing missing and that's a formal agreed list
> of types. To be used like this.
> <rdfs:seeAlso ... ns:type="rss20" ... />
> <link ... type="http://bar.com/metatype#rss20"; ... />
>
> Now if there's a type of http://bar.com/metatype#list (or something)
> that refers to one of these lists as well, we can construct arbitrarily
> complex networks of these files. And we would only need a single <link>
> entry that could happily go in every web page on a site.
>
> So how do we get this file type namespace built?
>
>
> --
> Julian Bond Email&MSM: julian.bond@voidstar.com
> Webmaster: http://www.ecademy.com/
> Personal WebLog: http://www.voidstar.com/
> M: +44 (0)77 5907 2173 T: +44 (0)192 0412 433
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>