RE: Atom vs Polyglot

I don't have any problem with ATOM today. However, I think the community is facing a transition from XML to JSON as a preferred method of language-independent exchange of structured data. If ATOM were to be designed today -- carrying metadata and control structures (about content) and also carrying marked up rich text, I'd look for a protocol that used JSON for the structured data and HTML for the marked up or active next.

Probably there needs to also be  a normative reference for "HTML suitable for embedding" (such as in email or included content) which also could be used for something ATOM-like using the technologies du jour.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Julian Reschke []
> Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 6:52 AM
> To: Larry Masinter
> Cc: Noah Mendelsohn; Robin Berjon; Alex Russell; List; Sam
> Ruby; Henri Sivonen; Jeni Tennison; Maciej Stachowiak
> Subject: Atom vs Polyglot
> Noah Mendelsohn <> wrote:
>  > You could imagine, for example, the ATOM folks considering a formal
>  > reference to polyglot had a polyglot spec been available at the time.
>  > ...
> Actually, I don't see how this would have helped and what problem it
> would have solved (and yes, I've been involved in Atom).
> (I *do* believe that Polyglot can be useful; I just don't understand
> that Atom reference).
> Larry replied:
>  > ... As for ATOM, perhaps it should be redone with JSON and HTML anyway.
> That's *really* vague, Larry. What is the problem you think needs to be
> solved in Atom?
> Best regards, Julian

Received on Friday, 22 March 2013 00:15:42 UTC