Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [opml-dev] Re: Common OPML attributes?

Expand Messages
  • Danny Ayers
    ... Cosmic squirmy worms? ... On a technical level, I agree this is a major step forward - the addition of namespaces increases the potential utility of this
    Message 1 of 14 , Sep 28, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      >Namespaces, theoretically cosmic, can
      >be squirmy worms in practice.

      Cosmic squirmy worms?

      >I like the way Dave Winer specced an allowance for namespace
      >extensions in the Extending RSS section of the RSS 2.0
      >Specification (located at
      >http://backend.userland.com/rss#extendingRss ):
      >
      >=====
      >"An RSS feed may contain elements not described on this page, only if
      >those elements are defined in a namespace.
      >
      >For guidance on how to do that, please refer to the W3C document."
      >=====

      On a technical level, I agree this is a major step forward - the addition of
      namespaces increases the potential utility of this RSS thread by an order of
      magnitude. I can't say I like the way Dave did it at all - rushing through
      and promoting an untested spec, and then discovering that it won't work with
      a lot of aggregators isn't very inspiring.

      >I think it's good to watch that process evolve before messing with
      >the OPML spec, whose elegant simplicity I heart greatly.

      Heh - it might have been better had the process evolved first, right now it
      looks like crawling out of the wreckage.

      I'm afraid I don't find OPML particularly elegant either - if there was just
      a single <ol> element in the spec, but also namespace support, now that
      would be elegant...

      Cheers,
      Danny.
    • Dave Winer
      Please, let s leave RSS politics off this list. It s bad enough on other lists. Thanks.. ... From: Danny Ayers To:
      Message 2 of 14 , Sep 28, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        Please, let's leave RSS politics off this list. It's bad enough on other
        lists. Thanks..


        ----- Original Message -----
        From: "Danny Ayers" <danny666@...>
        To: <opml-dev@yahoogroups.com>
        Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2002 2:00 AM
        Subject: RE: [opml-dev] Re: Common OPML attributes?


        >
        > >Namespaces, theoretically cosmic, can
        > >be squirmy worms in practice.
        >
        > Cosmic squirmy worms?
        >
        > >I like the way Dave Winer specced an allowance for namespace
        > >extensions in the Extending RSS section of the RSS 2.0
        > >Specification (located at
        > >http://backend.userland.com/rss#extendingRss ):
        > >
        > >=====
        > >"An RSS feed may contain elements not described on this page, only if
        > >those elements are defined in a namespace.
        > >
        > >For guidance on how to do that, please refer to the W3C document."
        > >=====
        >
        > On a technical level, I agree this is a major step forward - the addition
        of
        > namespaces increases the potential utility of this RSS thread by an order
        of
        > magnitude. I can't say I like the way Dave did it at all - rushing through
        > and promoting an untested spec, and then discovering that it won't work
        with
        > a lot of aggregators isn't very inspiring.
        >
        > >I think it's good to watch that process evolve before messing with
        > >the OPML spec, whose elegant simplicity I heart greatly.
        >
        > Heh - it might have been better had the process evolved first, right now
        it
        > looks like crawling out of the wreckage.
        >
        > I'm afraid I don't find OPML particularly elegant either - if there was
        just
        > a single <ol> element in the spec, but also namespace support, now that
        > would be elegant...
        >
        > Cheers,
        > Danny.
        >
        >
        >
        > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        > opml-dev-unsubscribe@egroups.com
        >
        >
        >
        > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        >
        >
      • Danny Ayers
        Ok. All that aside, I do think Stan s point about not messing prematurely with the OPML spec was valid. Cheers, Danny. ... Danny Ayers
        Message 3 of 14 , Sep 28, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          Ok.

          All that aside, I do think Stan's point about not messing prematurely with
          the OPML spec was valid.

          Cheers,
          Danny.
          ---
          Danny Ayers
          <stuff> http://www.isacat.net </stuff>

          Idea maps for the Semantic Web
          http://ideagraph.net


          >-----Original Message-----
          >From: Dave Winer [mailto:dave@...]
          >Sent: 28 September 2002 16:06
          >To: opml-dev@yahoogroups.com
          >Subject: Re: [opml-dev] Re: Common OPML attributes?
          >
          >
          >Please, let's leave RSS politics off this list. It's bad enough on other
          >lists. Thanks..
          >
          >
          >----- Original Message -----
          >From: "Danny Ayers" <danny666@...>
          >To: <opml-dev@yahoogroups.com>
          >Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2002 2:00 AM
          >Subject: RE: [opml-dev] Re: Common OPML attributes?
          >
          >
          >>
          >> >Namespaces, theoretically cosmic, can
          >> >be squirmy worms in practice.
          >>
          >> Cosmic squirmy worms?
          >>
          >> >I like the way Dave Winer specced an allowance for namespace
          >> >extensions in the Extending RSS section of the RSS 2.0
          >> >Specification (located at
          >> >http://backend.userland.com/rss#extendingRss ):
          >> >
          >> >=====
          >> >"An RSS feed may contain elements not described on this page, only if
          >> >those elements are defined in a namespace.
          >> >
          >> >For guidance on how to do that, please refer to the W3C document."
          >> >=====
          >>
          >> On a technical level, I agree this is a major step forward - the addition
          >of
          >> namespaces increases the potential utility of this RSS thread by an order
          >of
          >> magnitude. I can't say I like the way Dave did it at all -
          >rushing through
          >> and promoting an untested spec, and then discovering that it won't work
          >with
          >> a lot of aggregators isn't very inspiring.
          >>
          >> >I think it's good to watch that process evolve before messing with
          >> >the OPML spec, whose elegant simplicity I heart greatly.
          >>
          >> Heh - it might have been better had the process evolved first, right now
          >it
          >> looks like crawling out of the wreckage.
          >>
          >> I'm afraid I don't find OPML particularly elegant either - if there was
          >just
          >> a single <ol> element in the spec, but also namespace support, now that
          >> would be elegant...
          >>
          >> Cheers,
          >> Danny.
          >>
          >>
          >>
          >> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          >> opml-dev-unsubscribe@egroups.com
          >>
          >>
          >>
          >> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          >>
          >>
          >
          >
          >
          >To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          >opml-dev-unsubscribe@egroups.com
          >
          >
          >
          >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          >
          >
        • Jeff Mitchell
          ... So you woudl rather OPML remain more or less non-useful for another year? :) jeff -- It s murder out there. You can t even travel around in your own micro
          Message 4 of 14 , Sep 28, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            On Sat, 28 Sep 2002, Stan Krute wrote:

            > I think it's good to watch that process evolve before messing with the
            > OPML spec, whose elegant simplicity I heart greatly.

            So you woudl rather OPML remain more or less non-useful for
            another year? :)

            jeff

            --
            "It's murder out there. You can't even travel around in your own micro
            circuits without permission from 'Master Control Program'. I mean,
            sending *ME* down here to play games.... Who does he calculate he is?"
            -- Peter Jurasik as Crom, _Tron_
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.