Re: Re: XML_Atom?

From: Date: Tue, 02 Aug 2005 20:05:58 +0000
Subject: Re: Re: XML_Atom?
References: 1 2 3 4  Groups: php.pear.dev 
Request: Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-39143@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message
On Aug 2, 2005, at 2:39 PM, Joe Stump wrote:
Well, I'd planned on shooting for how DB manages slight differences in the various DB engines. I'd rather support 80% of all of the features of the feeds in the ambiguous Entry class and then allow an interface to the "raw entry".
I'm not sure that has to be an either/or, and I think it would be a shame to not be able to make full use of the atom spec (and worse if we were producing invalid feeds). This is certainly trickier in a feed generator than a feed parser. What I've been shooting for in my design is to mask the different feed types behind an API that can be used generically, but which still has the fallback of feed type specific APIs. Since atom is the most clearly defined spec, I've been leaning towards using atom as the normative feed type, and then providing mappings to atom element names within the classes for other feed types. James.

« previous php.pear.dev (#39143) next »