Re: [syndication] Some suggestions for RSS .92

["Dave Winer" <dave@userland.com>]

Yes, that's the <date> I was referring to. Dave


----- Original Message -----
From: "Jeff Barr" <jeff@vertexdev.com>
To: <syndication@egroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2000 10:52 AM
Subject: RE: [syndication] Some suggestions for RSS .92


> (Ignore my last post...)
>
> Dave, I am assuming that you are asking about the meaning of the
> <date> field, right? I would want it to be the publication time
> of the referenced item. If there are other dates of value then
> we could add additional field. I think that the publication time
> is of the most value.
>
> Jeff;
>
> Jeff Barr - Vertex Development
> Office: 425-868-4919  *** New Number ***
> Home:   425-836-5624
> mailto:jeff@vertexdev.com
> http://www.vertexdev.com/~jeff
> http://jeffbarr.editthispage.com/
> 4610 191st Place NE. Redmond, WA
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Winer [mailto:dave@userland.com]
> Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2000 4:07 AM
> To: syndication@egroups.com
> Subject: Re: [syndication] Some suggestions for RSS .92
>
>
> To Tristan, I'm uncomfortable voting for the <date> element unless there's
a
> spec that says how it fits into the 0.91 spec. The actual proposed
language
> for an 0.92 spec would be great.
>
> Jeff I'm not an expert on Dublin Core either, but I suggest we not go down
> that slippery slope. Keep it simple.
>
> Also, taxonomy is a big subject. The last time there were serious open
> discussions about next steps in RSS (in the May-June timeframe) this was
put
> on the table by Dale Dougherty at O'Reilly, and we had done some
> experimentation on it at UserLand. One of my jobs for this morning will be
> to dig up that thread and see what we did.
>
> I also want to work out a simple XML-RPC/SOAP integration, I want to make
a
> channel subscribable, so that the publisher calls the subscriber when
> there's an update.
>
> Finally, I had a meeting with the ICE Working Group a few weeks ago. I'm
> going to help them come up with a "lite" version that is philosophically
> compatible with RSS 0.91 and any successors (but not the
> Namespaces-RDF-modular thread, which I don't see as being philosophically
> compatible with RSS 0.91). They don't want to adopt RSS syntax, but they
> want to offer current RSS syndicators an easy way to participate in their
> networks. I think this is a good goal. They have an ICE "cookbook" which
is
> easy to follow, I've asked for an HTML version of this document, and
expect
> that we'll simplify it even more, and see where we can take it.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
>
>
>
>