Apologies for the high latency in my response, I have been traveling
over the last 10 days w/ only limited access to e-mail.   I'm back now
and ready to help wrap this up.

More in-line below...

-- Kyle

On 5/24/06, Tim Bray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

<co-chair-mode>
As we see it, there are really only 1.5 issues outstanding.  Media
entries is obvious.  I had an action item to make PaceMediaEntries
more human-readable; thus, check out http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/
pie/PaceMediaEntries5

There's been a lot of discussion of the iterations of this Pace, and
a lot of it was of the form "sort of OK, but I'm uncomfortable with
XXX".   So before we do the last-chance +/- survey, we'd like one
last call for amendments, improvements to the Pace that might move
people from negative to positive.

+1 to PaceMediaEntries5.  Nice work, James and Tim.

Second: Categories.  As of now, the draft is silent on the subject,
which your co-chairs think is questionable, and we want the WG to do
some more work.

PaceCategoryListing failed to achieve consensus on the grounds of
incompleteness: http://intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceCategoryListing

PaceCategoryListing2 was withdrawn: http://intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/
PaceCategoryListing2

PaceCategoryLink didn't get much commentary: http://intertwingly.net/
wiki/pie/PaceCategoryLink

Or, is the WG OK with explicitly giving up?

So, it's time for the WG to settle this.  Reasonable positions to
support might be:
- give up
- something like PaceCategoryLink
- something else.

I like the basic approach of PaceCategoryLink.  I prefer an
out-of-line link relation model that might also be refererenced from
multiple collection elements and even from feed documents.  This being
said, I think specifying a link relation but not the specifics of the
document it references doesn't create any real interop benefit.

PaceCategoryListing2 suffers from the same deficiency, and I'm -1 on
the original PaceCategoryListing because there is no out-of-line
reference model.

At this point, I'm ready to give up on category listing in Core.  It's
not part of the Blogger API
(http://www.blogger.com/developers/api/1_docs/) that we are migrating
to APP, so it's not vital functionality for us.

I am sympathetic to those who think it is important, and suggest that
we get together quickly to define and agree upon an extension.
PaceCategoryLink and the list discussions are a great starting point.
I'd be willing to participate and think that there would be benefit in
this (and other related functionality like comments/threading), just
not enough to block calling the APP Core done.

Let's hear your views.  Note that this is not a consensus call on
categories, but a call for the sentiment of how we should move
forwards on the topic.
</co-chair-mode>

I think we are very close.   I believe that APP provides a great
foundational building block not just for "weblogs, online journals,
Wikis, and similar content" (as defined in the charter) but also for a
broader set of collaborative web publishing and syndication tools.

The WG is to be commended for that.

-- Kyle

Reply via email to