bpkri wrote:Heh, I wouldn't call Atom 0.3 dead, as long as feed readers and sites like Technorati still support it.
The official IETF recommendation for Atom is the 1.0 format, so all previous versions (which always were in DRAFT state) are now obsoleted. That is why feed readers should think twice about implementing draft protocols, because they need to react to final implementations. So it's not like with RSS 0.91 and 2.0 which were official standard and need to be supported longer - Atom 0.3 never was a format, only an in-between state until the final implementation was ready.
Having said this, I do understand the need for supporting it, which is why s9y still supports Atom 0.3 - but I think we should stay close to the draft spec, which did not say that dc:subject should be used for categorizations.
Personally I do think that tags and categories are quite different. Categories always have a global scheme to rasterize your content; tags attributize your content with many leaf-tags and singular tag names.
Usually you have many tags for an article, but only one or two categories, which makes it easier to look up entries for categories when you only rougly know the topic, instead of tags were you should be able to quickly find what you are exactly looking for.
Of course this is all my humble, personal oppinion. *gg*
If you get any official or professional statements about this tag/category nomenclature, please let me know! It is easy and straightforward to change the implementation in s9y frmo dc:subject to category.