Re: [syndication] RE: [RSS-DEV] RSS 1.0 Release Candidate 1 (DRAFT)

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

Steven Roussey <sroussey@network54.com> writes:

> > It is not an option to rename RSS 0.9x. People already
> > call it RSS and I see no reason to suddenly make their
> > statements ambiguous.
> 
> I agree. I have nothing to do with syndication format creation. We
> just use them. No one here wants to deal with Netscape coming out
> with a different RSS v1.0 some time in the future.

Correct me if you think I'm wrong, but this would affect *any* group
intending to move forward with RSS, not specifically the RDF+NS
branch, correct?

This would seem to imply that any group wishing to move forward with
RSS should pick a new project name (plausibly based on the characters
"RSS", of course ;-).

This has been suggested before and, IIRC, been tentatively agreed to
by *all* the original parties (Dave Winer included).

This is the "stronger form" of both versions picking a branch (or
variant) name -- both groups pick a new full name, like RSS-Classic
and XRSS.

There has been only one perceived flaw in this approach, and it ain't
technical, marketing (re. user confusion), or personal, but political:
the RDF+NS group is organized and can move quickly to adopt, and move
forward, with a new name but what assurances do they have that "the
other group" (non-RDF+NS) will do the same when they get ready to move
forward with a new spec?

If an rss-dev WG vote on picking a new name, contingent on the
non-RSS+NS group also picking a new name, would be the solution to
this issue, just say the word.

  -- Ken