Archive of UserLand's first discussion group, started October 5, 1998.
Author: Ken MacLeod Posted: 9/4/2000; 11:30:05 AM Topic: scriptingNews outline for 9/2/2000 Msg #: 20813 (In response to 20811) Prev/Next: 20812 / 20814
It's still not so cut-and-dry as you make it out to be.
Dave is making the exact same argument as to why his version of the spec should keep the 'RSS' moniker. He also intends to provide a strikingly different solution to the same requirement, that of increased modularity and/or scope.
It has been suggested that both forks use a different name.
Somewhere along the line, it became assumed by a few that "more of the same" was the design goal of "the mainline" spec. It is not clear that there was ever consensus about even that. From the very beginning (June 2000) the majority of vocal participants have been in favor of the RDF+NS direction (nobody polled the silent masses, that I recall).
There are responses to this message:
- There is no such thing as "my version", Dave Winer, 9/4/2000; 11:42:52 AM
- Re: RSS name cutting and drying, David McCusker, 9/4/2000; 3:40:14 PM
This page was archived on 6/13/2001; 4:56:30 PM.
© Copyright 1998-2001 UserLand Software, Inc.