- Bill I was asking for your help and praising you. I guess it doesn t surprise me that this hurt your feelings, but believe me it was not my intention. We haveMessage 1 of 34 , Sep 29, 2002View SourceBill I was asking for your help and praising you. I guess it doesn't surprise me that this hurt your feelings, but believe me it was not my intention. We have to get beyond this somehow. I'm not leaving this community, and I gather that you aren't either. But we all pay too high a price for this animosity. Can't you give it up? I have. Dave----- Original Message -----From: Bill KearneySent: Sunday, September 29, 2002 4:13 AMSubject: Re: [RSS2-Support] Summary of issue with xmlns attributeNo Dave, I will not do your work for you. You need to do the heavy lifting yourself.If you're going to claim you're writing specs then you need to DO the work. Not just expect everyone else to pick up your slack. For well over two years your 0.92 spec has lacked a well-formed DTD or schema and the trend continues with psuedo-2.0. And namespaces? They're well over THREE years old and you still don't grasp them.Do you want progress? Then start by apologizing to me and retracting your slanderous posts.To hell with you and your condescending bullshit.----- Original Message -----From: Dave WinerSent: Sunday, September 29, 2002 7:08 AMSubject: Re: [RSS2-Support] Summary of issue with xmlns attributeBill just a suggestion -- you blame me too much. It must be holding you back in some ways. Try to find ways where you think I'm in your way, to route around me. A good example was the RDF serializer you produced for Radio. There you took advantage of an open architecture in the product I designed. Perhaps it frustrated you that Radio didn't support the format you liked the best -- so you solved the problem. Excellent. Now you could do the same thing for the missing DTD for 0.9x and 2.0. If you did, it would be a signal of great progress not just for you, but for the whole community since you are such an important part of it. Something to think about. Dave
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
- I don t think Sam is suggesting backing off current version numbers. I think he is suggesting two different version numbers for the newest Userland format. UseMessage 34 of 34 , Sep 29, 2002View SourceI don't think Sam is suggesting backing off current version numbers.
I think he is suggesting two different version numbers for the
newest Userland format. Use RSS 0.94 for the non-namespace format
and RSS 2.0 for the version with the namespace option.
--- In RSS2-Support@y..., "Dave Winer" <dave@u...> wrote:
> I thought of that of course, but it doesn't work -- because of the
existence of 1.0.
> One possible back-off is for the RDF folk to change the name of
their spec to something other than RSS 1.0. I don't see that
happening anytime soon, it's been debated ad nauseum, I can't devote
any more cycles to that option.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Sam Ruby
> That sounds like a very easy problem to solve. Resurrect the
> All RSS 0.91 feeds continue to work.
> All RSS 0.92 feeds continue to work.
> All RSS 0.93 feeds continue to work.
> All RSS 0.94 feeds will work.
> This also gives RSS content producers an unambiguous way to
> namespaces contained herein" via the use of an 0.9x version
> for RSS content consumers to get fair warning that the
> troublesome to some consumers) namespaces are present when they
> encounter a 2.0 version number.
> I love it when an apparently intractable problem has a simple
> - Sam Ruby