cc:Agent, foaf:Agent
Lucas Gonze
lgonze at panix.com
Wed Jan 7 17:09:19 EST 2004
On Wednesday, Jan 7, 2004, at 16:45 America/New_York, Mike Linksvayer
wrote:
> Still could, no?
Sure. I'm working out my own opinion by playing devil's advocate.
Like a lot of people, I have much respect for FOAF-as-XML, so I can see
the appeal.
As a rule you should avoid RDF in XML if it means you can't use an
ordinary XML parser. That doesn't happen until you reach a critical
mass, but every bit of RDF you put on gets you closer. It's already
true that somebody can stuff true RDF into CC metadata, making it
unusable in most apps.
The best reason to use foaf:Agent instead of cc:agent is that CC (like
everybody) should reuse standards. That's the most compelling reason
to use foaf:Agent, probably compelling enough to go ahead with it.
More information about the cc-metadata
mailing list