Re: [syndication] RSS 0.94

["Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net>]

I think it's a shame that these excellent comments got lost in the noise:


> - The 0.94 spec re-written in the style of the early RFCs, like rfc822
> for instance. These are models of clear, concise, accurate text that
> would be worth emulating.

+1

> - A deliberate effort to remove all ambiguity. There are a number of
> places in the proposed spec where language is used that is very open to
> interpretation. For instance, my favourite; "<link> is the URL of the
> story." in the <item> description.

+1

> - Notes on elements that are deprecated even though they are left in for
> compatibility.

+1

> - A more complete sample and sample snippets that illustrate the use of
> every element.

+1

> - Some commentary on common usage.

+1

> - The removal of the restriction on using link types other than http and
> ftp. In particular, I can't see any good reason for banning https and I
> can think of (fairly bizarre!) applications where news and mailto would
> be handy.

+1

> - A DTD and a set of recommendations of how to reference the DTD that
> can handle foreign character sets without breaking validating parsers.

+1


> - A note deprecating the use of entity-encoded html in any element
> except <item><description>

+1 (I'd make it true for description as well, but I know others feel
differently)


> - The removal of the copyright notice. I cannot think of any good reason
> for a corporate copyright disclaimer on a standards specification.

As I recall the notice, it isn't unreasonable.