Comments on: In-Feed Feedback

By: Danny Ayers, Raw Blog

Danny Ayers, Raw Blog — Sun, 05 Jun 2005 09:21:36 +0000

I’ve not had time to play with code on this (still fiddling with my backend but Christopher Schmidt and Russell Beattie have provided some useful info by including forms [...]

By: Christopher Schmidt

Christopher Schmidt — Fri, 03 Jun 2005 02:45:48 +0000

Jimmy: Yeah, that was really all I was saying. (Damn asynchronous conversations ;))

By: Jimmy Cerra

Jimmy Cerra — Fri, 03 Jun 2005 01:22:50 +0000

Chris, you can use any arbitrary element as the root. Try this xml fragment with the W3C’s validator:

That is a valid RDF/XML document! You are correct that it must be valid XML.

By: Christopher Schmidt

Christopher Schmidt — Thu, 02 Jun 2005 10:38:30 +0000

Jimmy: the rdf:RDF is optional, but only with a slight change to the syntax. Instead of using rdf:RDF as the root element (as Danny has done), you would have to use rdf:Description as the root. This is suggested by many schemas such as DOAP. No matter what, RDF/XML must be valid XML, so you can’t start with one thing and not end with it.

The image is upside down because it was a transfer from my gallery install, which for some reason flipped a few things, and because it amuses me to have it upside down, so I haven’t changed it.

By: Danny Ayers, Raw Blog

Danny Ayers, Raw Blog — Thu, 02 Jun 2005 10:00:44 +0000

Semantic Web Blogging — Danny @ 11:08

crschmidt’s now playing with In-Feed Feedback, implementing the thing as a WordPress plugin (”doing something us [...]

By: Jimmy Cerra

Jimmy Cerra — Thu, 02 Jun 2005 07:26:08 +0000

You are correct about the mistakes. Cooincidently, the rdf:RDF is optional according to the validator at least.

P.S Why is the one image upside down? A new way of getting attention in Flickr? j/k