Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
At 03:33 PM 05/01/01 -0800, Michael Brennan wrote: >This makes me think, now, that perhaps RDDL should include an "expires" >attribute Yeah, that could be useful. Given a little discussion, we could think up a few dozen other things that it might be useful. But the lesson the Web teaches, reinforced by XML, is that the way forward lies in Daring To Do Less. I'd say the right thing to do with RDDL or equivalent is get it out there, get some people using it, then the users can tell you what the important things you left out are, rather than you guessing in advance. Right now it's got one (1) machine-readable label in the arcrole=, one (1) hopefully-dereferencable URI in xlink:href=, some accompanying text, and an optional content-type= attribute. We could lose the last and maybe should; then we'd have the bare minimum. Important acronym: MPRDV. Minimum Progress Required to Declare Victory. This was Tim B-L's great leap - take hypertext and throw away guaranteed persistence and typing and address indirection and statefulness and transaction semantics and flexible document types and hey, what you have is still useful and anyone can implement it! XML 1.0 almost but not quite blew it by including too much stuff. Pardon my Friday-afternoon rant. -Tim
|
