W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-grddl-wg@w3.org > February 2007

GRDDL for Metalink, anyone?

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:23:11 -0600
To: GRDDL Working Group <public-grddl-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1172539392.4098.57.camel@dirk>

OK, it just crossed my radar for the 2nd time; 1st on slashdot,
now planetrdf:

Metalink unifies Internet downloads
http://www.geospatialsemanticweb.com/2007/02/25/metalink-unifies-internet-downloads

 -> http://www.metalinker.org/

reminds me of CDF and the push workshop, one of the original use cases
for RDF. GRDDL anyone?


[[
Frameworks and Applications

W3C has taken a "framework" approach to things like channels, packages
and such. We had the CDF submission in March '97, OSD and DRP in Aug
'97. We held a Sep '97 push workshop and ended up pursuing RDF, a
general framework for resource description and metadata, rather than
particular vocabularies.

The idea behind this sort of generalized approach is that it adds just a
little cost/complexity to each of the applications, but in return, each
application is part of a richer whole. Convincing the developers of the
first few applications when they can't see the benefits is a challenge.
(See also: the HTTP extension framework [@@link], XML namespaces, etc.)

But imagine what the Web would be like if you needed a different client
for search services, online documentation, community forums, and online
banking. Actually, you don't have to imagine, you can probably just
remember: you have used pre-web online information services, haven't
you? ;-)
]]
 -- http://www.w3.org/2000/08/w3c-synd/#Frameworks

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Tuesday, 27 February 2007 01:23:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:11:47 GMT