

RE: Atom and RDF

From: Jon Hanna <jon@hackcraft.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 04:06:31 +0100
To: "'Joshua Allen'" <joshuaa@microsoft.com>, "'Dare Obasanjo'" <kpako@yahoo.com>, "'Danny Ayers'" <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
Cc: <rdfweb-dev@vapours.rdfweb.org>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>, <semanticweb@yahoogroups.com>, <rss-dev@yahoogroups.com>, <atom-syntax@imc.org>
Message-Id: <20041012030651.3BBF2F7236E0@postie.hosting365.ie>

> to start a battle over "RDF vs. conneg in HTTP".  It's a pointless
> battle.  I think that retrofitting RDF into RSS is exactly the same --
> lots of extra complexity and drama for no obvious benefit, and you can
> use RDF in RSS already without having to mess with the transport.

The analogy is bogus. Conneg happens at a completely different layer,
however if you wanted to describe what was happening (i.e. give a
discription of what possible representations could be obtained for a given
resource, and in what cases) RDF would be the natural source.

Taking RDF out of RSS just doesn't compare.

Jon Hanna
Received on Tuesday, 12 October 2004 03:07:06 GMT
