W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > February 2005

Re: RSS 1.1 usage of parseType="Collection"

From: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2005 17:36:48 +0100
Message-Id: <e172329eb6429bc69eb880cf880ebf34@bblfish.net>
To: semantic-web@w3.org

I agree with the comments on this aspect of RSS1.1 [1]. In this
respect I prefer the Atom model where entries are directly attached
to the Feed, or in RSS1x talk the items are directly related to the
Channel.

The ordering seems to me to be more of something that would be worked
out in an interaction model between the server and the client.

Henry Story
[1] http://inamidst.com/rss1.1/

On 19 Jan 2005, at 16:47, Danny Ayers wrote:
>> 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)?
>
> Cheers,
> Danny.
Received on Saturday, 5 February 2005 17:19:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 07:41:44 UTC