Re: [syndication] Community consensus

[Ken MacLeod <ken@bitsko.slc.ut.us>]

"Dave Winer" <dave@userland.com> writes:

> The great thing about eGroups is that no one can tamper with the
> record. If there was a consensus, it *must* be evident here. I went
> to the trouble to read the archives over the summer. There isn't
> that much to read. I found no evidence that the question was ever
> asked on this list. I know for a fact that I was never asked to vote
> on the transition, and I don't think the general membership of this
> list was asked either.

It does not take an explicit vote or a poll to determine public
opinion or consensus.  One can easily determine consensus from reading
the individual opinions of the community, which are well represented
in this archive.

I've taken the liberty of generating a list of all of the participants
of [syndication] from the time of the first mention of a namespace
proposal (6/22) up until the announcement of the RSS 1.0 proposal
(8/14) and marking it with the authors of the RSS 1.0 proposal (*) and
those I know personally to be in favor of namespaces and/or RDF (+):

  <http://rsswhys.weblogger.com/discuss/msgReader$25>

The importance of this collection of data is to find consensus on the
*technical* direction of RSS.

Everyone: I did not try to read opinion into any of the other messages
on the list.  If your name appears on that list, could you please
indicate (here or on RSSWhy?s) your preference.

I believe that it is only in the light of technical consensus can we
determine whether or not the political action taken was appropriate or
not.

  -- Ken