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

content:encoded

Expand Messages
  • Randy Morin
    Some members of the RSS community want to introduce an element content:encoded in an appendix to the RSS specification that we are working on. I d like to hear
    Message 1 of 2 , Feb 21 8:40 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Some members of the RSS community want to introduce an element
      content:encoded in an appendix to the RSS specification that we are
      working on. I'd like to hear from the board members, if this stands
      any chance of getting adopted.

      My personal belief is that introducing new elements to the RSS
      specification (even in an appendix) is outside of our charter and
      does not respect the roadmap.

      Roadmap: We anticipate possible 2.0.2 or 2.0.3 versions, etc. only
      for the purpose of clarifying the specification, not for adding new
      features to the format.

      http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss

      I've also heard similar reluctance voiced here.

      Meg Hourihan: I did not think it meant changing the spec
      (e.g. adding new elements, removing un-used elements, etc.).

      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rss-board/message/20

      This is not a binding vote, just an attempt to determine the will of
      the board and you can choose to simply ignore this. Please respond
      either "yes, I'm in favor of adding extensions to an appendix of the
      spec" or "no, I'm no in favor of adding extensions to an appendix of
      the spec" or "abstain".
      Thanks,

      Randy
    • rcade
      ... I m withholding judgment on the idea until I can float a draft page for review on RSS-Public and see what people think. I can t tell whether it s a good or
      Message 2 of 2 , Feb 21 8:59 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In rss-board@yahoogroups.com, "Randy Morin" <randy@...> wrote:
        > My personal belief is that introducing new elements to the RSS
        > specification (even in an appendix) is outside of our charter and
        > does not respect the roadmap.

        I'm withholding judgment on the idea until I can float a draft page
        for review on RSS-Public and see what people think. I can't tell
        whether it's a good or bad idea yet.

        I would like to find some way on rssboard.org to promote the most
        useful namespaced elements.

        There is precedent for supplementing the spec with additional
        documentation. The skipHours/skipDays and encoding examples pages are
        both linked from RSS 2.0.1-rv.6 and several preceding versions:

        http://www.rssboard.org/skip-hours-days
        http://www.rssboard.org/rss-encoding-examples

        The RSSCloud interface also is documented separately:

        http://www.rssboard.org/rsscloud-interface
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.