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

Re: read the specification?!

Expand Messages
  • ecomputerd
    Scot, I understand your point completely. But I wasn t suggesting that everyone just read the specification for the fun of it. Amy Gahran was specifically
    Message 1 of 2 , Jan 3, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Scot,

      I understand your point completely. But I wasn't suggesting that
      everyone just read the specification for the fun of it. Amy Gahran
      was specifically talking about trying to understand the enclosure
      line through "immediately assume[ing]" and then complaining about
      not being able to "enter and explore the mysteries" and further
      lamenting about "But why, oh why, can't they go back and clarify
      those terms in the key documents".

      Clearly those who would want to "explore the mysteries" are not
      themselves "'ordinary' humans". Ok...maybe I'm wrong about that, but
      if you've gotten to the point of being able to create or modify an
      RSS 2.0 document and are just confused about the length attribute,
      then you've already gotten through (or appropriately ignored) much
      of the complexity of the specification. Sometimes understanding
      specifications is done by cherry picking the parts that make sense.

      The only reason my hackles are raised is the answers are exactly
      where Amy Gahran suggests they SHOULD BE: in the "key documents".
      Amy just apparently failed to look OR those key documents are
      confusing in a way that hasn't been explained.

      I don't mean to be a rude or obnoxious geek. But jeez, if your going
      to go exploring, get the well-published, and free, map. By
      suggesting that because some specifications, like XML, are too
      complicated for 'ordinary' humans and therefore all specifications
      should be ignored by those 'ordinary' humans wishing to explore RSS
      2.0 is kind of a leap.

      Maybe it was the 'tecno-snobbery' comment that set me off.

      Again, I'm not trying to be rude to anyone on the board. I'll gladly
      interact (and have) with those wishing to explore RSS definitions
      and implementations. I absolutely don't mind helping or explaining
      things that *I* understand. Publicly or privately. Need help? Just
      ask.

      I'll try not exhibit any techno-snobbery while helping. If I do, let
      me know. (Hmmm....am I now?)

      --- In podcasters@yahoogroups.com, Scot Mcphee <scot.mcphee@g...>
      wrote:
      > >Why, oh why, must non-geeks lament about the apparent techno-
      > >snobbery when all that is required is to READ THE SPECIFICATION!
      >
      > I am an uber-geek, and even I find this funny. Specifications are
      not
      > meant to be read by 'ordinary' humans, but by implementers of
      systems,
      > i.e. other geeks. Audience, audience, audience.
      >
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.