RE: [syndication] Healing the community (was: Dear Ken)

[dave.cantrell@gunter.af.mil]

>What I think really *is* dangerous is the split in the community: What
>Danbri and others are trying to say is let's heal the community and not
>worry about putting the formats back together -- this seems unlikely. Let's
>work together and make great software that takes advantage of RSS, of all
>sorts.

(Note: I realize much of this has already been discussed, but maybe there's
something of merit here -- I'm rambling right before I head home -- if
anything offends, I apologize in advance, because it's absolutely not
intended at all)

ISTM that the underlying problem here was caused by naming the RDF format
RSS 1.0. This immediately cut Dave Winer and the 0.9x crowd out of the loop
by preventing them from moving forward. This also appears to be the root of
the "rename 1.0" push.

If they wanted to be really ornery, they could just move forward and call
their's RSS 2.0, or even worse, RSS 1.0!

But thankfully cooler heads are prevailing.

I agree and disagree with renaming 1.0. We've been over this subject
extensively just in the short time I've been here, but I still feel (as
Aaron seems to, among others) that *both* of these formats are essentially
the same thing. It's like saying a Camaro and a Firebird are different --
under the surface (and to a "geek", or car enthusiast) they may be
implemented/built a little differently, but to the average user (like me, a
plain ol' driver) they are the same thing. One goes faster, one may be
roomier, but that's it.

Ok. There should be two forks. This is a good idea. But I still hold fast to
the belief that *both* are RSS and therefore it should all be tied back in
somehow. I still favor the idea:

	RSS 0.91
	RSS-Simple (0.92 on)
	RSS-Semantic (RDF-based)

All three formats have their pros and cons: 0.91 is simple but not
extensible; 1.0 is extensible but is not simple (to the non-RDF users); 0.92
can be whatever Dave and the rest of the .9x users want it to be, but I
believe his focus will obviously be on the "simple" aspect first.

Maybe I'm just rambling here (been a long day) but I don't see why we can't
all just agree that we all want syndication, that RSS 0.91 is strictly
headline syndication and is the birth-mother of all the formats we are
discussing here, and all of us live happily ever after?

I understand there is some hurt feelings on both sides, and I can understand
why. Personally I think naming the RDF version RSS 1.0 was a bad move, but
history is 20/20 and it can't be changed. Instead, we should move forward
together.

And of course, we are now moving forward. The events on the list(s) the last
couple of days have been very encouraging, and I for one am glad to see it
happen.

Bottom line: I'm just a developer, and I want to keep on developin'. XML
syndication is the coolest thing I've played with since Legos and I want to
do more of it. Thankfully, these groups (here and RSS-DEV) are here to help.

I guess I just want to say "Great work" to everyone involved, both to 0.9x
and 1.0 sides. I use them both in different areas, and love the choice. I'd
hate to see either one be sacrificed for anything.

Thanks for letting me blather on. See y'all tomorrow morning.

-dave