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

RE: The Tragedy of RSS

From: Nick Gibbins <nmg@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2002 13:40:43 +0100
Message-ID: <15773.35915.195986.637665@localhost.localdomain>
To: www-rdf-interest Mailing List <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>


Bill de hÓra <dehora@eircom.net> writes:

>>> In the meantime, Dublin Core strikes me as sufficient RDF for RSS
>>> 2.0.

>> Point of information: Dublin Core is a bibliographic metadata
>> vocabulary which is independent from, and which predates RDF.

> Yes. In the context of this discussion, DC in RSS [x] is going to go
> through RDF; so with all due respect I think you're splitting hairs.

This is a fair criticism - I was splitting hairs rather more than I
ought.

> Unless you think RDF should be cut out and DC embedded in a
> different way in RSS?

Absolutely not; I'm fully in favour of expressing RSS itself in RDF
(as in RSS 1.0), and regard the RDF-free RSS 2.0 as a bit of a
retrograde step.

However, I question whether the use of DC-in-RDF [1] elements in a
document which is not an RDF document can really be said to be a use
of RDF per se, especially given that the element names are identical
to those used in a 'pure' XML encoding of DC [2].

[1] Expressing Simple Dublin Core in RDF/XML
    http://dublincore.org/documents/2001/11/28/dcmes-xml/
[2] Guidelines for implementing Dublin Core in XML
    http://dublincore.org/documents/2002/09/09/dc-xml-guidelines/

-- 
Nick Gibbins                                            nmg@ecs.soton.ac.uk
IAM (Intelligence, Agents, Multimedia)             tel: +44 (0) 23 80592831
Electronics and Computer Science                   fax: +44 (0) 23 80592865
University of Southampton
Received on Friday, 4 October 2002 08:40:48 GMT

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