RE: [RSS2-Support] Re: Summary of issue with xmlns attribute
>>So the answer is not to listen to anyone - bravo!Uhhh perhaps that's an unforunate choice of words. Perhaps it should have been phrased as a question. In which case the answer would be, hello Danny, I've been listening and listening and enduring flames and such, waiting for a consensus.Given: 0.91 still rules in installed base. (This is confirmed by Syndic8 and another crawler, pointer on RSS-DEV).Also given: We want extensibility and forward motion. (I do, I assume the others do as well, if not stick with 0.91).So therefore we listen and try to understand and compromise.Someone has been telling you that I'm not listening, apparently, but if that were so, why am I doing so much listening? ;->I accept your first two points, but that's where it stops. You may have been listening, but your actions have been almost diametrically opposed to what people have been saying. You wouldn't be hawking a broken spec if you'd listened, understood or compromised.Well, best of luck with it.Cheers,Danny.
- 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. 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