* Danny Ayers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-11-11 11:56+0100] > > If we can have a http: scheme URI for the base of link rel, then why > not for the namespace? > > Personally I would prefer a http: URI for the reasons Dan mentioned. > The use of these is widespread - every single namespace URI I have > seen in the context of syndication follows this pattern. Is current > practice compelling at all?
On the extensibility front, there has been occasional mention here of possibility for transforming (by XSLT, or even XQuery) from Atom's format into RDF/XML. W3C has a Note on one technique for doing so, called GRDDL, which makes use of metadata about namespaces to figure out which XSLT-defined mappings are appropriate to get RDF/XML from some instance data. http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/NOTE-grddl-20040413/ http://www.w3.org/2003/g/data-view esp. http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/NOTE-grddl-20040413/#ns-bind I believe there's an implementation that consults namespace docs for this info 'while you wait', though to be fair I couldn't find it just now. So the motivating scenario is that the AtomPub WG could make an atom2rdf.xsl available and cite it from the Atom format's namespace document in a machine-friendly way. This only becomes compelling if RDF toolkits start to acquire the ability to get their RDF via XSLT transforms, rather than just parsing RDF/XML notation. I think this is starting to happen, eg. http://people.w3.org/~dom/archives/2004/11/grddl-support-in-rap/ Most of the attention around GRDDL to date has been w.r.t. the XHTML-oriented version, but it seems to have wider potential. Dan
