RE: [syndication] Re: Total confusion in RSS-Land

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

Aaron,


As I already posted today, RSS 1.0 is not backwards compatible and forces
people in extra complexity even when they do not use the extra power
(features).

Taking the RSS name cuts the evolution of a simpler version. What can the
"simpletons" do?
  RSS 0.99, RSS 0.99.01.0, 0.99.01.5 ... ???

Not very nice huh? Should fork.

Even if you do not understand why someone prefers a simpler evolution,
even if you think they are taking a wrong self-limiting turn, they do
want to do it that way and should be respected.
=:o)

The easier way is for RSS 1.0 to take another name. It will not loose
followers because of that and everybody will be happy.


Have fun,
Paulo Gaspar


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Aaron Swartz [mailto:aswartz@swartzfam.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2000 01:13
> To: syndication@egroups.com
> Cc: Rael Dornfest; rss-dev@egroups.com
> Subject: [syndication] Re: Total confusion in RSS-Land
>
> I don't understand this. How does work on a new version of RSS affect work
> that has already been done on the old one? We're not taking away 0.9 and
> 0.91 from you! My.UserLand is just as useful and relevant as it
> always was.
> Perhaps you could explain to me why the publication of RSS 1.0p is a waste
> of a lot of people's hard work.