Re: [syndication] Autodiscovery standards and formal specification

[Klaus Johannes Rusch <KlausRusch@atmedia.net>]

In <015f01c2fa1e$d817b370$f5457743@mnotlaptop>, "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net> writes:
> RSS has not been formally specified.

Well it has been specified more than once in competing specifications :-)

Disagreement on version details and the meaning of the acronym aside, would
the RSS community be interested in and willing to submit a specification to
a standardization body like the W3C or ECMA?

This does mean giving up control for the proponents of current RSS
specifications, though.

> Therefore, a media type for RSS cannot be registered.

Unless one of the x- media types was chosen (which given the relative 
popularity of application/xml+rss would be a bad idea).

> Therefore, autodiscovery cannot be formally specified (not that it would
> need to be, if the media type were registered; it's already spelled out in
> the HTML spec).

The HTML specification does not cover Alternates for non-HTML content, nor are 
the recommendations for the title attribute very specific either.

-- 
Klaus Johannes Rusch
KlausRusch@atmedia.net
http://www.atmedia.net/KlausRusch/