Re: Thoughts, questions, and issues.

[Aaron Swartz <aswartz@swartzfam.com>]

Hello Dave, thanks for sharing your side of the story. Hopefully RSS can
come to a resolution, but if not, it's good to hear your point of view.

Dave Winer <dave@userland.com> wrote:

> Why don't we just adopt what they're using and add it to RSS?

I think that the idea behind the use of namespaces is that we get the
benefits of both. If someone wants to use RSS in a way that hasn't been
approved by the "RSS tribunal" or whomever is managing the spec, they can do
it, in a way that won't affect anyone else. (That way we get the benefit of
movement and things don't get to slowed down or stagnated.) If we want to
keep a stable core base, which people understand and agree on and is widely
accepted by the aggregators, we can do that too, by having agreed-upon and
approved modules.

The point is that we're not trying to prevent anyone from doing anything, by
saying that can't modify the spec. If they want to add something to it, they
can go right ahead and do it. If we want to keep an "approved" portion of
RSS, we can do that too, but not at the expense of other development.

Does this make sense? I'm not sure I quite understand your concerns, but I'd
love to hear them.

Thanks,

-- 
        Aaron Swartz         |"This information is top security.
<http://swartzfam.com/aaron/>|     When you have read it, destroy yourself."
  <http://www.theinfo.org/>  |             - Marshall McLuhan