Danny Ayers wrote:
One thing I'm not sure about - where it currently says "Atom processors", perhaps that would be better as merely "Atom consumers". For the reasons Sam gave, we don't really want extra variability in what's being produced, but this still would still allow RDF-like consumers to interpret the feed as an RDF-like language. Does that make sense, or is there a case I'm missing here?
I'm still struggling to understand what this is for. So, let me ramble for a few minutes...
Assuming that there will be an XSLT which maps Atom to RDF, such an XSLT will have to map all unnamespaced attributes into something with a namespace. The namespace of the element is a reasonable choice.
I'm a bit concerned about precedence rules (what happens if there is an href attribute *AND* an atom:href attribute?). What makes most sense here is for a prohibition disallowing such in any exension. I would support such a rule.
Finally, I'm a bit concerned about round tripping - i.e., producing valid feeds from an RDF triple store. Given that an unnamespaced attribute and a namespaced attribute are two different things - how can a valid feed be produced?
- Sam Ruby
