- From: Jon Hanna <jon@hackcraft.net>
- Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 04:06:31 +0100
- To: "'Joshua Allen'" <joshuaa@microsoft.com>, "'Dare Obasanjo'" <kpako@yahoo.com>, "'Danny Ayers'" <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
- Cc: <rdfweb-dev@vapours.rdfweb.org>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>, <semanticweb@yahoogroups.com>, <rss-dev@yahoogroups.com>, <atom-syntax@imc.org>
> to start a battle over "RDF vs. conneg in HTTP". It's a pointless > battle. I think that retrofitting RDF into RSS is exactly the same -- > lots of extra complexity and drama for no obvious benefit, and you can > use RDF in RSS already without having to mess with the transport. The analogy is bogus. Conneg happens at a completely different layer, however if you wanted to describe what was happening (i.e. give a discription of what possible representations could be obtained for a given resource, and in what cases) RDF would be the natural source. Taking RDF out of RSS just doesn't compare. Regards, Jon Hanna <http://www.selkieweb.com/>
Received on Tuesday, 12 October 2004 03:07:06 UTC