Re: [syndication] Re: Thoughts, questions, and issues.

[Dan Brickley <daniel.brickley@bristol.ac.uk>]

On Tue, 22 Aug 2000, Aaron Swartz wrote:

> "Real Simple Syndication" (to borrow a phrase from Dave). For those who want
> Real Simple Syndication, this spec is not for you. We've tried to make it

Let's be careful to distinguish between the spec and the data format. 

I believe the data format is as simple as it can be, while remaining
extensible enough to deal with various threats to RSS that have been
looming (eg. territory clash with WAP/WML, Mozilla Sitemaps, Dublin
Core, e-commerce XML formats, HTML modules, you name it...). The spec is
pretty simple (compare to ICE spec, for example, and no disrespect to
ICE intended), but not written for all audiences at once. We need
tutorials, tools, samples...

Specifications such as these typically target a fairly technical
audience. We've tried to keep it accessible (eg. introducing the
basic example early on -- one thing we know from Dublin Core and W3C
stuff is that people typically cut and paste from examples). However
the spec isn't designed as the sole reference/tutorial/quickstart etc
guide for all content creators. In the week since the 1.0 proposal hit
the streets, various of us have been busy putting together tools, examples
etc. to round out the package for non-geek audience.

So, please don't leap from "this spec isn't for me" to "this data format
isn't for me"! 

The XHTML-to-RSS work announced earlier today is an example; this shows
one strategy whereby the RSS 1.0 proposed *data format* can work for a
site without the content creators having to go near the spec itself. All
they do is write in a certain RSS-friendly dialect of XHTML, and we do
the rest for them. This strategy won't be everyone's cup of tea, but
it's a simple, flexible start.

Please, "this spec isn't for me" does not imply "this format isn't for
me". 

(hands up anyone who has read the HTML 4.x spec from cover to
cover? Hasn't stopped people creating HTML... same goes for HTTP.)

Our intention is that the help/tutorial/etc documents should be simple
enough for every web site on the planet to offer an RSS feed, *and* that
the RSS data format be flexible enough to cope with this level of adoption. 

So we're extremely serious about this format being easily adoptable, but
aware of the need to have a format that can cope with *everyone* using
it. Sure, it's a balancing act. On balance I can't see anything simpler
scaling to the Web...

--danbri