- From: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
- Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2010 09:37:38 +0100
- To: UMarks <info@umarks.org>
- Cc: Richard Light <richard@light.demon.co.uk>, <semantic-web@w3.org>
On Thu, 02 Sep 2010 18:35:01 +0100 UMarks <info@umarks.org> wrote: > I hadn't heard of XBEL, so I have checked it out in an attempt to > answer your question. It's a pretty well-known format for bookmarks, and is the native bookmark format for several browsers. Revising XBEL to create a v1.2 compatible with existing software seems a much more productive route than devising a new format. > Firstly, it looks like it has been some time since XBEL was updated. > Much of the documentation dates from 1998, and the last update to > anything I could find was 2002. It doesn't seem to be under active > development. One man's "not under active development" is another man's "stable". > Bookmarks have moved on since then, and this shows in the scope of > XBEL. For example it lacks support for favicons, keywords or > summaries; most of which are additions that have become more > commonplace since the late 90's. There is a <metadata> tag where one > could ostensibly capture some of this mind you. There is a <desc> tag suitable for summaries. Keywords/tags can be stored using <metadata> (there's an example of using <metadata> for tags here - http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2005/03/02/restful.html). There is an "icon" attribute on <folder> and <bookmark> elements, though it's not a URI, so may be of limited utility. > I couldn't quite work out how a bookmark hierarchy was maintained, > although I assumed it was by creating a nested arrangement within the > file itself. The same xml.com article I linked to above (which is the first hit on Google for 'xbel example') contains an example with nested <folder> elements. -- Toby A Inkster <mailto:mail@tobyinkster.co.uk> <http://tobyinkster.co.uk>
Received on Friday, 3 September 2010 08:38:22 UTC