Archive of UserLand's first discussion group, started October 5, 1998.

Next steps

Author:Dave Winer
Posted:9/6/2000; 12:21:01 PM
Topic:scriptingNews outline for 9/2/2000
Msg #:20915 (In response to 20850)
Prev/Next:20914 / 20916

Trying to reason with them is going nowhere. These people want the name, and they're clearly not planning on giving it up. Arguing with them over the justification for using the RSS name is not worth wasting any more time on, as if presenting valid arguments could convince them to back down.

I believe there's a fair amount of money at stake in this, that's why they're being so persistent. It's probably not about right or wrong, it's probably about making money. Look at all the money around WAP for a clue.

I'm glad I did the survey yesterday. I'm getting emails from leading content providers and CMS makers that agree with our point of view. Namespaces will at some point probably play a role in RSS, once the developers are ready for them. RDF will not play a role in RSS, despite what the first acronym said about RDF. It's such a silly argument, just not worth having.

There's also a clear mandate to do RSS 0.92. I think we should proceed in that direction. If anyone has suggestions about how to do that, let's get a discussion going. If not, then RSS can stay right at 0.91, and the subject of moving it forward incrementally can be re-opened at any time.

There are responses to this message:

This page was archived on 6/13/2001; 4:56:32 PM.

© Copyright 1998-2001 UserLand Software, Inc.