[georss] using categories for disambiguation

[Sean Gillies]

Andrew Turner wrote:
> On 3/8/07, Gregor J. Rothfuss <gregor at apache.org> wrote:
>> i am advocating it because i think the elements are superflous. i would
>> have brought this up earlier but i never even realized they existed :)
> 
> fair 'nuff.
> 
>> i'd be more in favor of sean's idea:
>>
>> <category term="mountain" scheme="http://georss.org/physiography"/>
> 
> I agree that this is attractive b/c it still specifies that you are
> referring to geography and not, say "the mountain of stuff you have to
> do this afternoon". That was why I pointed out the Geonames features
> for physiography.
> 

I can't take any credit for it, it's in the Atom spec. RSS 1 and 2 have 
their own equivalent elements, I presume.

>> plus i just discovered another design problem: according to
>> http://georss.org/1/xml/1.0/georss.xsd {relationship,featuretype}tag are
>> attributes, not elements. that means they are single-valued, which makes
>> folksonomies hard, because you have to settle on the one true term,
>> instead of supplying as many as you see fit.
> 
> That is a "won't go away" error in the schema documentation. They were
> made elements before 1.0.

Cheers,
Sean

-- 
Sean Gillies
http://zcologia.com/news