Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Hi Dare, > Metadata, like semantics, is in the eye of the beholder. One person's > data is another's metadata. Can we say that if the "about" attribute in an rdf:description refers to a resource we can get, see with a viewer (for instance a web browser) or process with a gizmo, that we are talking of meta-data. If not, we are probably talking about data. > >From where I stand, RSS feeds are a counter example to the arguments in > the Metacrap essay. > Off course, the RSS application has a lot of criteria for success and honesty from the part of the publishers. Basically saying where a resource is located is very limited meta data about a resource. As long as the end point is not anonymous as it is the case with email, there are some incentive to be honest with the other fields like author, date and summary. Pushing the analysis further author may be a pseudonym, the date may be made more recent to bring it to the top of stack of an agent and summary can be filled with good keywords as soon as we have agent performing a search in summaries. So, even RSS may be the target of the green bill lovers :-) sooner or later.... Cheers Didier PH Martin
|
