foxfirefey (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
foxfirefey) wrote in ![[site community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/comm_staff.png)
dw_dev2009-06-27 03:37 pm
foxfirefey) wrote in dw_dev2009-06-27 03:37 pm
Entry tags:
Protocols discussion
Somebody brought up the topic of Really Simple Discovery and the Metaweblog API in dw_news, so now might be a good time to discuss protocols and our plans.
We currently have one bug to update the Atom publishing protocol and some bugs about updating our XML-RPC.
This is a post to collate discussion about:
1. What APIs do we currently support, and what state is our support for them in?
2. What APIs exist and what are their pros and cons? How popular are they with regards to services and clients that support them? How extensible are they, since we have unique posting metadata? Which ones would be a good fit to implement or improve? Where are good resources and documentation about them?
3. Where do we want to head with posting APIs, our overall goal?
* Atom -- old version, needs upgrading desperately. We have a bug for this here. Once updated, we can start extending the protocol to support our custom features.
* Blogger -- had for a while, probably outdated.
* Flat API -- custom LJ flat API, destined for death.
* LJ XML-RPC -- custom LJ XML-RPC API, might be destined for death if we can adequately extend Atom
* Metaweblog -- this seems to be very popular as well. Apparently del.icio.us uses it to do auto-links-posting, for instance.
* RDS -- Really Simple Discovery -- this seems to be a generalized way to let clients know what protocols we support
* FOAF -- http://foxfirefey.livejournal.com/data/foaf
* Interests data -- http://www.dreamwidth.org/misc/interestdata.bml?user=foxfirefey
* OPML -- http://www.dreamwidth.org/tools/opml.bml?user=foxfirefey
* Icon data -- http://foxfirefey.dreamwidth.org/data/userpics
* Fdata -- Don't have this yet and whether we will is still up in the air; discussion on this here; issues include whether or not we are showing data that isn't shown on the profile
dw_news, so now might be a good time to discuss protocols and our plans.We currently have one bug to update the Atom publishing protocol and some bugs about updating our XML-RPC.
This is a post to collate discussion about:
1. What APIs do we currently support, and what state is our support for them in?
2. What APIs exist and what are their pros and cons? How popular are they with regards to services and clients that support them? How extensible are they, since we have unique posting metadata? Which ones would be a good fit to implement or improve? Where are good resources and documentation about them?
3. Where do we want to head with posting APIs, our overall goal?
Currently supported for posting
* Atom -- old version, needs upgrading desperately. We have a bug for this here. Once updated, we can start extending the protocol to support our custom features.
* Blogger -- had for a while, probably outdated.
* Flat API -- custom LJ flat API, destined for death.
* LJ XML-RPC -- custom LJ XML-RPC API, might be destined for death if we can adequately extend Atom
Other posting APIs
* Metaweblog -- this seems to be very popular as well. Apparently del.icio.us uses it to do auto-links-posting, for instance.
* RDS -- Really Simple Discovery -- this seems to be a generalized way to let clients know what protocols we support
Current supported and not supported data stuff
* FOAF -- http://foxfirefey.livejournal.com/data/foaf
* Interests data -- http://www.dreamwidth.org/misc/interestdata.bml?user=foxfirefey
* OPML -- http://www.dreamwidth.org/tools/opml.bml?user=foxfirefey
* Icon data -- http://foxfirefey.dreamwidth.org/data/userpics
* Fdata -- Don't have this yet and whether we will is still up in the air; discussion on this here; issues include whether or not we are showing data that isn't shown on the profile
no subject
Would definitely be good to get delicious output working properly here, but the encoding issue is a problem, really need to chase up my support request to them on that one.