> 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. Regards, Jon Hanna <http://www.selkieweb.com/>Received on Tuesday, 12 October 2004 03:07:06 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:10 GMT