- From: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
- Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 11:58:22 +0100
- To: Thomas Landspurg <thomas.landspurg@gmail.com>
- Cc: SUZANNE Benoit RD-SIRP-ISS <benoit.suzanne@orange-ftgroup.com>, public-webapps@w3.org
On Mar 13, 2009, at 08:33 , Thomas Landspurg wrote:
> Good suggestion. I think RSS/Atom is well adapted for new widgets
> publication. I think that keeping the platform attribute is
> interesting, because we - as many - we will have to support
> different format for some time.
The issue I see with that is that it would require defining a
platform, which can get to be somewhat complex (operating system,
version, intel/ppc, 32/64/128bits, etc.) and if it is going to be of
any general use then the vocabulary for platform specification needs
to be specified — i.e. you can't "just" have a platform element or
attribute, you also need to define its values in such a way that all
can understand them.
As a result I'd tend to suggest that we punt on this, and people who
need to have the platform specified can use an extension in their own
namespace.
--
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/
Feel like hiring me? Go to http://robineko.com/
Received on Friday, 13 March 2009 10:59:06 UTC