Re: [syndication] Re: feed list format and such

["Bill Kearney" <wkearney@syndic8.com>]

> There's been a great amount of heat (and even some light) thrown back and
> forth on this issue.  FWIW, I don't like the fixed filename idea.  The one
> constant feature of *every* website is the root document.  Placing site
> metadata in the header of the root document is an ideal approach.  The <link
> rel="something" type="something" href="URI"/> syntax is plenty rich enough to
> handle the task.

+1

> Those parties that throw the "waste of bandwidth" argument are forgetting
> about the HEAD request.

They'd doublessly counter with 'default document requires only ONE request'
excuse.  It's a weak one but one they'll flog anyway.

A number of early RSS readers didn't do this (and some still don't).  They
mindlessly request the whole document instead of making the lightweight HEAD
query first.  It's a false economy letting them think 'one request' is easier.

> The whole root document does not *have* to be
> retrieved.

Yep, layering is going to be important.

> Those parties wishing to use '/myPublicFeeds.opml' should be free to do so, as
> well.

Nope, non-starter.  I don't want the idiocy of spiders hammering away looking
for this dumb-ass idea.

> Put that in your <link> header and everyone gets happy.  Or don't.  It
> doesn't actually matter until you argue that the fixed-filename approach
> should be the *only* way.

Or at all.

> None of us are prescient.  None of us truly know what the web will be next
> year, let alone in 2995.

Speak for yourself, I get my time machine fixed and I'm going the hell back to
2995.  Anyone got a flux capacity lying around?

> It behooves us all not to cast limitations in stone
> this early in the lifespan of the web.  Robots.txt was a well-intentioned
> mistake.   Favicon.ico is a 'Second E' deployed by a single vendor.

I'm not prepared to lump them together.  robots.txt provides a useful function.
It's certainly not without it's issues but it's painless to get people on-board
with using it.  The favicon.ico thing is made doubly worse since it uses the
'.ico' file format not something reliable like png, jpeg or gif (let alone
allowing the option).  Right now site operators know what robots.txt does /for/
them.  Their site logs aren't going to get bloated up with oddball 404 errors
because they're already supporting it.  And if they're not the documentation on
why using it is a good idea largely explains it.

> Even '/index.html' is so 2001.  (hint: how many CMS use PHP?)

Heh, how many bookmarks get ruined when someone uses /index.html and the site
switches to /default.asmx... +1

> Namespace pollution is more than just a vanity issue and should be
> stopped now, before it really gets out of hand.

Not sure I follow where you're going with that.

> Above all, don't worry about the clients!  Letting clients drive standards
> just gets you IE.  Concentrate on building a flexible standard that's
> naturally adaptable to as yet undiscovered applications and technologies.
> Successful clients will adapt, unsuccessful clients won't, and Darwin's Law
> will be preserved.

+1 (although I do actually like using IE, so there)

-Bill Kearney