RE: [syndication] ScriptingNews: The future of RSS

["Paulo Gaspar" <Paulo.Gaspar@krankikom.de>]

I still fail to see why old RSS formated data, where _NO_ namespaces
where used, has to use them after convertion without the data being
extended or merged with anything else.

I like namespaces WHEN they simplify my life.


Have fun,
Paulo

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ken MacLeod [mailto:ken@bitsko.slc.ut.us]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2000 10:33
> To: syndication@egroups.com
> Subject: [syndication] ScriptingNews: The future of RSS
>
>
> Flavor A: http://static.userland.com/gems/backend/sampleRss.xml
> Flavor B: http://my.theinfo.org/rss/newversion.xml
>
> They look very similar to me, which makes me wonder what all the
> hubbub is about.
>
> I haven't figured out the gain of having explicit RDF statements
> within each RSS instance, I thought that sort of information could be
> maintained out of band.  Here's hoping someone can clear that up for
> me.
>
> The RDF+NS RSS 1.0 proposal has one of the cleanest and most
> appropriate uses of XML namespaces I've ever seen.  It's obvious to me
> how Flavor B can be extended by anyone, at anytime, without stepping
> on anybody else toes or requiring a central authority or
> clearinghouse.  Is it possible the reaction to namespaces is more a
> reaction to onerous uses of namespaces in other specs rather than its
> use in RSS?
>
>   -- Ken
>
> 
>
>
>