W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > January 2005

Re: RSS 1.1 usage of parseType="Collection"

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 11:21:47 -0500
To: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
Cc: Christopher Schmidt <crschmidt@crschmidt.net>, Ian Davis <iand@internetalchemy.org>, www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Message-ID: <20050121162147.GA27765@homer.w3.org>

* Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com> [2005-01-19 16:47+0100]
> 
> >From a modelling point of view, the container/collection side of both
> RSS 1.0 and 1.1 do seem a little troublesome. I'll pass on figuring
> out the details here ;-) But both express membership and order in a
> way that to me doesn't seem to fit very well with the domain model,
> which seems generally to be what's at the feed URI at a given point in
> time is a sliding window onto the conceptual feed comprised of all
> items (ever).
> 
> An early question - the 1.1 spec says "order of the [items] child
> elements is significant" - but what is the significance (bearing in
> mind that most RSS 1.0 feeds incorporate a dc:date)?

There are some feeds, eg. upcoming movies/concerts, job listings etc,
where the most helpful ordering for users is related to the things 
the docs in the feed describe, and not the dates of the linked documents 
themselves. it's healthy for RSS to note that the ordering is important, 
without specifying exactly which property of what is sorted to provide
the ordering.  So 15 movies might be listed 'next first', rather than by 
last-updated data of the 15 pages that describe those movies, for eg.

Dan
Received on Friday, 21 January 2005 16:21:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:12 GMT