- --- In rss-dev@y..., "Bill Kearney" <wkearney99@h...> wrote:
> It looks interesting. Care to share with us why that format better(a) I like RDF, NITF is not RDF based. It's unclear why NITF even
> suits your needs? How was this better/worse than using NITF?
exists when RSS 0.92 does.
(b) The PRISM spec seems more standards based than even RSS since
most of the tags are straight RDF and DC. I.e. no channel,link,etc.
tags needed since RDF and DC generically express those concepts.
(c) It further defines the semantics and "best practices" of DC & RDF
attributes & tags through PRISM, which is very helpful. I.e., what
do I use for dc:type, dc:publisher etc.
(d) It has unique attributes that I need (like prism:expirationTime)
BTW, I spoke with Frank Manola personally yesterday regarding the
semantic web, RDF, URIs, and other fun stuff.