A newbies opinion (if I still qualify!)

["James Shaw" <yahoo@coveryourasp.com>]

I *think* the point of renaming is to make it easier for developers 
who are just discovering RSS to choose the path to take.

For me, eventually, it was an easy choice because once I zoned out of 
the amazing amount of noise on the lists and looked at the specs, I 
found I needed the extensibility of the RSS-DEV effort. 

I now have the first of my RSS feeds at 
http://CoverYourASP.com/RSS.xml. It uses dublin core and will shortly 
use two new namespaces that I'll create for extensions (two because 
one of the extensions might be useful to others).

Dave, having new, non-RSS, names wouldn't have helped me a jot. 
Sorry. They really wouldn't. I have to say that the words RDF and 
semantic wouldn't either. I'm just a simple Joe who wanted to share 
some links to his site. So, if the names had been RDFSS or any other 
collection of letters like that, you would have wasted your time 
renaming them.

BUT. If I'd seen RSS-simple/base/basic and RSS-extensible/namespace 
there would have been no confusion. I'd have looked at RSS-basic (my 
vote) and seen that it lacked what I needed, then looked at 
RSS-extensible (my vote). Voila!

Really, I understand more and more with each email the pain everyone 
feels. I'm still very p*ssed that I had to trash STORS. I liked it 
and it worked. And I didn't spend years doing it. 

So, as one of the new people I still feel I have the outside 
perspective to see what would eliminate the confusion. This is the 
problem with polling existing community members - they may not see 
the situation the same as a new guy that's just had an email 
saying "why didn't you use RSS"...

James Shaw
http://ASPRSS.com/ (Coming June 15th!)