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

Re: [rss-board] Re: RSS Feed Autodiscovery

Expand Messages
  • James Holderness
    ... For the record I m +1. I d like to see some of the issues addressed that have been discussed in rss-public, but if there are strong objections to any
    Message 1 of 11 , Nov 23, 2006
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      >> To date, there has not been such a spec, which makes it difficult for
      >> programmers to find accurate information. I propose that the RSS
      >> Advisory board approve this spec to fill that gap. Looking for a second.
      >
      > I second the proposal, so board members have the next seven days to
      > vote on the adoption of this spec.

      For the record I'm +1.

      I'd like to see some of the issues addressed that have been discussed in
      rss-public, but if there are strong objections to any changes I'd be happy
      with the current doc.

      Regards
      James
    • Paul Querna
      ... I am also +1 on the current spec. I also agree with all of the points James has raised, and would like to see another revision incorporating some of them.
      Message 2 of 11 , Nov 24, 2006
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        James Holderness wrote:
        >>> To date, there has not been such a spec, which makes it difficult for
        >>> programmers to find accurate information. I propose that the RSS
        >>> Advisory board approve this spec to fill that gap. Looking for a second.
        >> I second the proposal, so board members have the next seven days to
        >> vote on the adoption of this spec.
        >
        > For the record I'm +1.
        >
        > I'd like to see some of the issues addressed that have been discussed in
        > rss-public, but if there are strong objections to any changes I'd be happy
        > with the current doc.

        I am also +1 on the current spec.

        I also agree with all of the points James has raised, and would like to
        see another revision incorporating some of them.

        -Paul
      • Jake Savin
        +1 from me as is. That said, I wouldn t mind seeing a revision that addressed the concerns that have been expressed around the title attribute, and
        Message 3 of 11 , Nov 27, 2006
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          +1 from me as is.

          That said, I wouldn't mind seeing a revision that addressed the concerns that have
          been expressed around the title attribute, and clarification around HTML vs XHTML. I
          know, for example, that some versions of UserLand's aggregator expect either to see
          a self-closed <link/> tag (XHTML-style) or not -- though I don't remember which, but
          some clarification in the spec would be helpful.

          Rogers [& Randy]: You'd said[1] on rss-public that you'd do a revision on the 24th --
          is that what I see when I look at http://www.rssboard.org/rss-autodiscovery right
          now?

          -Jake

          [1] - http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/rss-public/message/1102

          --- In rss-board@yahoogroups.com, "Randy Morin" <randy@...> wrote:
          >
          > As I've previous written here, we've been working on official
          > specification for RSS autodiscovery.
          >
          > http://www.rssboard.org/rss-autodiscovery
          >
          > To date, there has not been such a spec, which makes it difficult for
          > programmers to find accurate information. I propose that the RSS
          > Advisory board approve this spec to fill that gap. Looking for a second.
          > Thanks,
          >
          > Randy Charles Morin
          > http://www.kbcafe.com/rss
          >
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.