[Standards] microblogging maintainer :)

Dave Cridland dave at cridland.net
Mon Dec 20 15:38:35 UTC 2010

On Mon Dec 20 17:23:49 2010, Thomas Baquet wrote:
> 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)?

Because PubSub nodes contain items - replacing the item element with  
an Atom element would mean breaking compatibility with PubSub. It  
doesn't seem useful to do that.

Dave Cridland - mailto:dave at cridland.net - xmpp:dwd at dave.cridland.net
  - acap://acap.dave.cridland.net/byowner/user/dwd/bookmarks/
  - http://dave.cridland.net/
Infotrope Polymer - ACAP, IMAP, ESMTP, and Lemonade

More information about the Standards mailing list