Re: [syndication] PRISM and RSS

[Dan Brickley <daniel.brickley@bristol.ac.uk>]

On Fri, 1 Jun 2001, David Smiley wrote:


> I dare somone (I mean this civily) to present a
> compelling argument why RSS 1.0 AND PRISM need to exist, or why RSS1.0 is
> "better".

> PRISM 1.0 spec (259 KB): http://www.prismstandard.org/techdev/prismspec1.asp

------------------^^^^^^ ;-)   (no offence to the prism guys, its a great spec)

I like PRISM a lot, but RSS 1.0 is simpler. And neither is "more
RDF based" than the other. We can mix PRISM constructs into RSS 1.0
feeds, or RSS 1.0 extension modules could be used in PRISM. My take is
that PRISM comes much more from an "industry" perspective than (all
flavours of) RSS, so there may be some culture clash too in the way the
spec(s) are produced and managed.

The point of RDF in this context is that both can proceed happily, and
applications can be written that consume either or both kinds of RDF
data. RSS 1.0 exists, is useful, and doesn't (because of the use of
XML namespaces and RDF) need to be interfered with much. The interesting
work now should be on tools, tutorials and content, not the core
spec. We've seen interest in the last two days on extending RSS for use
with calendar/event descriptions and with music; neither extension
requires us to change RSS 1.0, they're both simply additional RDF
vocabularies. As such, they can also be mixed with PRISM data. 

Dan