RE: [syndication] Thoughts, questions, and issues.

["Paulo Gaspar" <Paulo.Gaspar@krankikom.de>]

Thanks for your continuous insistence on staying SIMPLE Dave.


The more I see talk of 2 zillion XML related standards that are supposed to
be respected at all time the more I think that XML is gradually being taken
by the complexity that plagued SGML.

It seems that the only difference is that XML standards are getting complex
on a piece-by-piece basis instead of all-at-once.

That is happening with:
 - the XML "core" standards (I can not get enthusiastic about stuff like
   the Infoset);
 - the Syndication related standards;
 - SOAP.


XML main advantage over SGML was supposed to be simplicity... or did I get
it wrong?

Why not build XML standards as simple cores that allow for extensibility
instead of trying to cover all the possible and impossible functionalities?

Namespaces can be convenient if one wants to build extensions... but why
not making namespace use optional - only for those cases?


I would like it so much that standards would respect a bit more the KISS
principle even at the cost of the Holly Graal of completeness.


Sorry if I go partially out of topic, but this obsession with completeness
(at the cost of simplicity) that menaces RSS is a general trend.

Have fun,
Paulo Gaspar


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Winer [mailto:dave@userland.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2000 01:32
> To: syndication@egroups.com
> Subject: Re: [syndication] Thoughts, questions, and issues.
>
>
> Ian, I'm glad other people are thinking independently.
>
> I'd like to see RSS become a publish-and-subscribe model,
> connecting through
> SOAP and XML-RPC.
>
> I'd also like to see it be a better fit for tools like Blogger and Manila
> and non-web-based writing tools like Radio UserLand.
>
> I'd like to hear content syndicators say what they're looking for, if
> anything, from next-generation RSS.
>
> And I want it to stay simple, because that's its magic.
>
> I'm interested in hearing other peoples' thoughts.
>
> Dave
>
>
> 
>
>
>