Re: Rich syntax for DC modules and validation

On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 11:17:53 -0000, Phil Shaw <phil-BtY/pAun/[email protected]> wrote:

> Dust has settled on this for a while, so I thought I would try to
> give it a final push with an assertion that the rich syntax for DC
> module metadata is valid RSS 1.0.

I think I mentioned a similar issue on the validator list too, if I
remember correctly:

<dc:subject rdf:resource="http://subject-uri.org" />

I might perhaps have given the wrong impression with recent posts re.
<enclosure>, but my own opinion is that RSS 1.0 augmented with *any*
other elements and attributes should be considered valid RSS as long
as the core requirements are in place and the file as a whole is valid
RDF/XML. I can't speak for the RSS 1.0 WG, but I do get the impression
from the published specs that this should be the case.

A feed validator may still be very useful if it can't give a
definitive answer, and warns that it doesn't understand non-core data,
see [1]. But false negatives are bad style, especially when there are
RDF/XML parsers available off the shelf.

Cheers,
Danny.

[1] http://dannyayers.com/archives/2004/11/16/rss-10-module-attributes/


-- 

http://dannyayers.com


 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rss-dev/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/