On 12/25/08 10:35 PM, Brett Zamir wrote: > Hi, > > Along the lines of how Data Forms types and Data Forms Validation can > influence display of forms, I'd like to see some standard way in which > Pubsub payloads could be similarly extensible, not only by allowing > different namespaces (as is now allowable within Atom extension elements > or for a wholly different root namespace), but by some extensible > standardization which could give more hints than either of these at > input and display type. Data Forms & Data Forms validation might > themselves be used as a payload, but I can see a need for more types > targeting display of different types of GUI elements. For example, it > would be nice to know whether an uploaded file (which could use > sipub:file-transfer as the datatype) should be suggested as an image, an > iframe, a link for download, etc.. This would allow: > > 1) As with DF, a uniform way to know how to display payloads > 2) Allow semantic extensibility while also being able to suggest a > display mode when the semantic namespace is not recognized. > > However, even with DF + DFV, there would need to be some way to indicate > that DFV was also supported (if these are kept as separate specs), since > Pubsub only allows for specification of one payload namespace--this > might, I imagine, be done by requiring that both namespaces be supported > if used as a Pubsub payload or, even better, by adding an option to > Pubsub to indicate additional sub-namespace(s) that are > required/supported). > > While Atom is extensible, there is no way to make a meta-data query to > know what inner namespaces are supported (or to specify which ones > during Node configuration), so DF+DFV (or any other option) is not so > suitable as an Atom extension. DF + DFV could be used as the root, even > indicating Atom namespaces+type within <field var>, but again, there > would be no way to detect ahead of time which semantic namespaces (such > as Atom) were being used within DF+DFV without first accepting the payload. > > Thus I'd like to suggest > 1) a list-multi option be added to Pubsub to allow additional supported > sub-namespaces to be indicated (whatever the top-level namespace).
Doesn't that break the rule of one namespace per node? > 2) Data Forms and DFV be extended to offer greater specificity in types > suggesting various input and display elements. (Maybe some existing GUI > kit could be used as the basis for such a namespace.) > > Also, I think it might be nice to have an option to be able to indicate > whether the namespaces (or subnamespaces) were required for proper > viewing, or just supplementary. I don't see a strong use case for this yet. Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
