Brian Smith wrote:
Bill de hOra wrote:
Let me it another way - do we need to make categories
resources and provide them with atom:ids? If so, let's do that.
RFC 4287 says:
The "term" attribute is a string that identifies the
category to which the entry or feed belongs. Category
elements MUST have a "term" attribute.
The "scheme" attribute is an IRI that identifies a
categorization scheme. Category elements MAY have a
"scheme" attribute.
In other words, categories are (supposed to be) uniquely identified by @term,
not by (@scheme, @term). So, terms must be globally unique to be unambiguous
and so they SHOULD (IMO) be IRIs already.
There was never any intent to make categories globally unique; nor is
there any justification to requiring them to be so. The scheme
attribute tells the processor how to interpret the value of term, which
can be any string value, including an IRI. In my application, I can
define a scheme value that indicates that the term is a globally unique
IRI. I could even define a scheme that indicates that the term is a URI
that can be dereferenced. Processors that understand the scheme will be
able to process it accordingly.
e.g.
<category
tag="nonunique" />
<category
scheme="http://example.org/number";
term="123" />
<category
scheme="http://example.org/unique";
term="tag:example.org,2008:/unique" />
<category
scheme=http://example.org/url";
term="http://example.org/foo"; />
- James
- Brian
