114Re: [RSS2-Support] another namespace question
- Oct 1, 2002On Monday, September 30, 2002, at 10:06 PM, Phil Ringnalda wrote:
> Some parts of Dublin Core (date, creator, contributor, and subject) areThat's what I would think on the face of it too, but the fact that I
> quite widely used. But using dc:description rather than description
> is, um,
> unusual. With my feeble understanding of RDF, it seems a bit backward,
> the RSS 1.0 schema  defines description as a subPropertyOf
> dc:description, so I think the way the theory goes is that an RDF
> that doesn't know from RSS will find and parse the RDF schema for RSS,
> that description is a subPropertyOf dc:description, and then when
> asks it for a dc:description of Infoworld, it'll say "here, here's an
> description, that's just a particular type of dc:description." I didn't
> think it worked in reverse (if I say "gimme a fruit", you say "here's
> orange", but if I say "gimme an orange", you don't say "here's a bowl
> cherries, grapes, and pineapple"), so I would expect that a
> schema-aware RDF
> parser would say that feed doesn't have an RSS description.
saw only <dc:description>'s in the InfoWorld feed, without also having
<rss:description>'s (or <description>'s) threw me for a loop.
In terms of current practice, it seems as though at least some
non-namespace-aware aggregators will happily present a <dc:description>
to the user, even though it may not be aware of the Dublin Core at all.
Is this the case? Is this also the case for namespace-aware parsers?
Or -- should we consider this to be a bug in InfoWorld's feed?
> But, as Morbus said, practically, you just add everything you've everThat sounds like a slippery slope to me, unless I'm misunderstanding
> to a list of possibilities, in descending order of preference. Given
> Radio users are more used to seeing full items with HTML, I'd say
> content:encoded , description, dc:description. For a start.
(which is of course quite possible). ;-)
It seems to me that either I understand an element or I don't. Saying
that I understand an element not intended for me (in this case
<dc:description>), but only if the one I was looking for
(<rss:description>) is not present seems wrong.
I don't want the addition of namespace awareness to Radio's aggregator
break our users. I also want Radio to do the right thing when it
encounters an element it doesn't know about.
Looks like my choices are:
1) I should leave it the way it is, and live with the possibility that
some feeds will display content to Radio users that was not intended
2) I have to add support for the Dublin Core to Radio's aggregator.
(Are there others? Which ones?)
3) I should report a bug to InfoWorld and live with the breakage after
adding namespace support to Radio's aggregator.
Am I interpreting the issues correctly, or did I miss something?
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>