W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > October 2002

RE: The Tragedy of RSS

From: Bill de hÓra <dehora@eircom.net>
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 13:37:58 +0100
To: "'Dan Brickley'" <danbri@w3.org>
Cc: "'Paskin, Norman \(DOI-ELS\)'" <n.paskin@DOI.org>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Message-ID: <003201c26ba2$dee181f0$1fc8c8c8@mitchum>




> From: Dan Brickley [mailto:danbri@w3.org] 
>
> FWIW I've worked on RSS 1.0, DC, ABC as well as tracking the 
> INDECS, CRM etc work. There's no conflict: RDF was designed 
> so that all such vocabs could be deployed within the same 
> overarching framework. And RSS 1.0 was designed so that wide 
> range of descriptive vocabulaies could be deployed within RSS 
> feeds. Oftentimes, Dublin Core is plenty complex enough. 
> Sometimes, a more explicitly modelled representation is worth 
> the extra effort it imposes on consumers and producers of the feeds.

Ok Dan, I assume by plenty complex, you mean adequate, not complicated.
For example something I've come across: using DC/RSS to feed SMS
notifications. I'm buggered if I can see where the complexity is in the
data or what possible objection anyone could have to having DC in RSS;
RDF in the large I can understand.

Bill de hÓra 
--
Propylon
www.propylon.com 
Received on Friday, 4 October 2002 08:39:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:56 GMT