Re: [syndication] OCS Version 0.5 draft

[mof-syndication@mfd-consult.dk]

Hi there,

On 06 Sep 2002 05:02:07 -0700, burton@openprivacy.org wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>Morten Frederiksen <mof-syndication@mfd-consult.dk> writes:
>
>> Hi (Kevin),
>> 
>> On Thursday 05 September 2002 04:18, you wrote:
>> > I can't help but think that the concept of an RSS feed is obsolete:
>> Interesting, but what does it have to do with this?
>> 
>> > 1.  We have ways to search for content on other peers via standard formats
>> > (SOAP over any binding (JXTA, BEEP, HTTP))
>> Maybe so, but certainly not in widespread use, not something that I see 
>> changing soon.
>
>OCS 0.5 isn't in widespread use.
True, "widespread" is a stretch, perhaps "practical" would be better.
Even so, it is more so than other listing formats (with the possible
exception of the fit-all/-none format OPML).

>> I don't see the point of mod_subscription when mod_link exists, i.e. bloating
>> the RSS with constant metadata. This information should stay separate from the
>> feed itself, it's not related.
>Did you *read* the mod_subscription spec?  SRDF can be used with mod_link to
>link to a mod_subscription RDF file from main RSS feed.
Yes, thank you very much, I did read the spec.

It's a module. As such, it's (primary) use is expected to be within a
feed, which is also what the majority of your examples show.

If you have changed your proposal to an external format linked by
mod_link, fine, but then remove the module proposal.

I still see no point in a feed-linked channel list, it's better the
other way around.


Regards,

Morten Frederiksen
--- 
#33 It never hurts to suck up to the boss
-- 
<URL: http://www.mfd-consult.dk/ >