W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2010

Re: change proposal for issue-86, was: ISSUE-86 - atom-id-stability - Chairs Solicit Proposals

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 10:45:22 +0200
Message-ID: <4BC6D222.9030608@gmx.de>
To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
CC: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>
On 14.04.2010 23:09, Sam Ruby wrote:
> ...
> Speaking only as a member of the Atom community: the notion of defining
> one not only seems harmless, it actually is (mildly) appealing. That
> being said, what is currently in the draft specification is actively
> harmful. It is my hope that any browser vendor strongly consider the
> input of the Atom community before implementing what is currently spec'ed.
>
>> In which case I recommend that you seek the feedback of the Atom
>> community, and fix potential bugs in the spec (such as thise described
>> in my first change proposal, but there may be more).
>
> If there is a consensus to fix these and other bugs, then I would
> support an Atom mapping remaining in the W3C HTML5 spec.
> ...

In that case, I'd really like to see a discussion on the questions below:

- What is the use case? News sources that don't want to publish separate 
feeds? If they do already, what is the problem with that? Why would they 
want to stop?

- Who is supposed to implement this? Browsers? Feed readers? (are they 
supposed to start consuming HTML5 in *addition* to the various things 
called "RSS" and Atom?)

- Why does this need to be part of HTML5? Why does this need to be a W3C 
activity anyway?

- What are potential alternatives? RDFa, Microformats (hAtom) and 
Microdata come to mind.

So yes, having a bijective mapping between a certain subset of HTML and 
another subset Atom is an interesting thing to think of, but it's 
totally *not* clear whether it's something that needs to be done here.

Best regards, Julian
Received on Thursday, 15 April 2010 08:46:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:07 GMT