[Standards] microblogging maintainer :)

Thomas Baquet ld.blackfox at gmail.com
Mon Dec 20 17:23:49 UTC 2010

On 20/12/2010 15:16, Dave Cridland wrote:
>> The problem is by using Atom that you'll limit reply node to Atom 
>> content then - otherwise, you'll lost the power of pubsub, even if 
>> Atom is extensible; a stupid example should be: if I want to answer 
>> with a mood, or a tune (even if it is basically expected for PEP, 
>> nothing should prevent me to post this)
> Atom can be used to frame arbitrary content, as far as I'm aware. 
> Absolutely nothing prevents you from "replying" with a mood element 
> embedded in Atom. The Atom just buys us all the threadings and post 
> mobility. 
Isn't it blending pubsub with atom too much? I mean, atom is a kind of 
content like other which can be in a pubsub item. If we decide to use it 
as a container of (in the previous example) mood element (or any kind of 
content), why not directly replace item element with an atom entry (if 
it can embed the kind of sub-element we want)?

Thomas Baquet (aka Lord Blackfox)

Jabber ID: ldblackfox at papaya.im
Website: http://www.lordblackfox.net/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/#!/LordBlackFox

More information about the Standards mailing list