[georss] using categories for disambiguation

[Sean Gillies]

Or, for Atom users:

<category term="mountain" scheme="http://georss.org/physiography"/>

Hosting a few key schemes might be a worthwhile side-project for georss.org.

Sean

Pat Cappelaere wrote:
> Andrew,
> 
> I do not see anything wrong to say:
> <category>mountain</category>
> No even a need for geo:type=
> Pat.
> 
>> From: Andrew Turner <ajturner at highearthorbit.com>
>> Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2007 15:52:03 -0500
>> To: "Gregor J. Rothfuss" <gregor at apache.org>
>> Cc: Pat Cappelaere <pat at cappelaere.com>, <georss at lists.eogeo.org>, Raj Singh
>> <raj at rajsingh.org>
>> Subject: Re: [georss] using categories for disambiguation
>>
>> On 3/8/07, Gregor J. Rothfuss <gregor at apache.org> wrote:
>>>> A category is a category is a category!
>>>> Having multiple categories tags make the decoding harder from an
>>>> interoperability standpoint.  Everybody will be doing it differently.
>>>> You can have more than one category tag anyway!
>>>>
>> I don't think of the location type or relationship as a "category",
>> they are actual geographic meaning an relate the location
>> name/geometry to the RSS item. And because they have different meaning
>> (not just another category) you would end up putting in
>> <category>geo:type=mountain</category> or something anyways.
>>
>>> i suspect those two snuck in because they have a meaning in GIS. they
>>> sure don't in the larger RSS world.
>>>
>>> the 'just in case' school of standards leads to 600 page monsters that
>>> no one reads unless forced to.
>>>
>> Well, as one who has already admitted to not sitting down in a comfy
>> chair to read 600 page specs, I agree with simple & not "just in
>> case". But you're advocating changing the standard just because it
>> hasn't been widely used yet.
>>
>> It doesn't really matter to me *how* we relate geometry to the story,
>> I just want to be able to publish & consume location information and
>> know how that relates to the RSS item. If that's machine tags in the
>> category I guess that works, but there is a solution already somewhat
>> in place in {relationship,featuretype}tag so I think it would just be
>> better to promote using it.
>>
>> Andrew
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> georss mailing list
> georss at lists.eogeo.org
> http://lists.eogeo.org/mailman/listinfo/georss
>