Re: Visible MetaData == "Visible to whom?" was Re: Design Principles

On Mar 29, 2007, at 11:38 AM, T.V Raman wrote:

>
> Actually it's a cause and effect problem -- today browsers show
> something visible because links to feeds were a success.

But while people were waiting for browsers, they added duplicate <a>  
links to their pages. Why couldn't those have been the same thing?

> You can argue until eternity as to which is the cause and which
> the effect; I still believe that RSS and ATOM linking would not
> have happened without the link element. The problem with  someone
> coming up with the feed="uri" attribute on A elements and
> succeeding is that that person then needs to wait for the
> browsers to implement it.

I don't see how that follows. Non-browser user agents can look for <a  
rel="feed"> in the content just as readily as <link rel="alternate">.  
There is no need for the browser's permission to include either.

And with <a>, content authors would not have to wait for *any* tools  
to provide additional support, even non-browser tools, since users  
would be able to see and click on the feed link.

> Innovation should not be limited to
> browser vendors; that will kill the Web permanently --- or at the
> least cause it to stagnate --- as  the period since 1998 proved.

I don't think this is relevant to the claim at hand. We're talking  
about two different existing extensible mechanisms that are already  
understood by browsers. The difference is that one of them had a  
visible end-user effect without the need for new browser features.

Thus, visible metadata reduces the need for browser involvement in  
web innovation.

Regards,
Maciej

Received on Thursday, 29 March 2007 18:51:10 UTC