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

Time for a name change?

Expand Messages
  • Bill Kearney
    Hi all, Seeing as the version number arms race is looking unlikey to stop, what s the consensus on name changes? Is it time recognize that syndicated XML is a
    Message 1 of 80 , Sep 17 11:47 AM
      Hi all,

      Seeing as the version number arms race is looking unlikey to stop, what's the
      consensus on name changes?

      Is it time recognize that syndicated XML is a lot more popular than the efforts
      of just one vendor? Is there sufficient momentum to just picking up and moving
      to a new name?

      In the past it may have been necessary continue the campaign. Have we reached
      the point that it's better to just move on?

      The reality is that whatever we call this format any tools out there are famliar
      with the current effort will continue to work. We can collectively weather the
      storm a name change would cause. The developers have come forth recognizing the
      value of a community driven effort. We'd be striking off in a new direction,
      but with followers.

      Yes, it's indeed handing it to Winer. But he appears to be so hell-bent on a
      pyrrhic victory that it's become pointless to continue. He appears so
      maniacally bent on maintaining his co-opting of Netscape's work that it'd
      probably better to just give it to him while taking all the developers to the
      new format.

      So how do we move forward on raising a vote to entertain the idea of a name
      change? That's without actually announcing such a change, of course. We'd have
      a lot of issues to consider before making any sort of annoucements. Purls,
      domain names, etc.

      Is there interest in a poll to gauge the value behind considering a name change?

      -Bill Kearney
    • Bill Kearney
      ... Whoa there, what pseudo-2.0 understands about namespaces and what s correct about using them are two entirely different matters. And it s not our job to
      Message 80 of 80 , Sep 20 1:05 PM
        > RSS did fork. What is the major difference namespaces and RDF.
        > Namespaces is no longer an issue. While it wasn't the name, it is a
        > reminder.

        Whoa there, what pseudo-2.0 understands about namespaces and what's correct
        about using them are two entirely different matters. And it's not our job to
        educate the 2.0 developers on fixing that.

        > I'm only suggesting that the name reflect its purpose rather then its
        > technical inerts. I'm opposed to XML being in the name also just less
        > so. I'm not out to attack RDF nor am I suggesting it has to go. (This
        > goes to me comments earlier also.)

        Sure but we'll need to get consensus on what it does before we pick a name. I'm
        quite strongly inclined to recognize it's about pushing topical ephemera about.
        Stuff that looks sot of like news. Can it be used for other stuff? Sure! But
        for anyone still clinging to 'site summaries' sadly there are very few feeds
        doing that.

        > This is a fair definition for today's common usage, but somewhat
        > limiting for future potential uses that have been discussed here in
        > the past. I can think of applications where the information is not
        > updated "frequently" (a vague term) or where "alerting" is not its
        > function.

        Well, we're now three years into RSS and the staggering majority of feeds are
        all about news-like items. Stuff like alerting and what-not are perfectly
        suited for use as modules. (I have done a lot of thinking here). As for past
        hopes of other uses, there's really very little data to support that any
        significant effort/progress has been made on those fronts. Tons of potential
        though.

        -Bill Kearney
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.