Well, I'm still here (and commenting on occasion) but am interested in a
format for syndication of various types of data. The discussion here (of
which RSS is the most discussed instance) is focussed on syndication of
news-summary-style data.
So, the first question I'd ask is -- what does the word 'syndication'
mean, in the context of this list, and what goals do the list's members
have for such a syndication language?
Ian
On Sun, 15 Oct 2000, Tristan Louis wrote:
> A message to the lurkers on the list:
>
> There are only a few people talking in this thread yet egroups shows
> that there are 239 members on the list. Folks, it's time to delurk.
> We have a lot of work to do here.
>
> First, we need to come to term as to whether we want to move on to a
> spec that would be different from the RSS 1.0 one. There still seems
> to be some issues around that. According to the poll on that matter
> (http://www.egroups.com/surveys/syndication?id=320021) a vast
> majority want to move on to 1.0. However, that vast majority is 12
> people out of 16 votes. On 239 members, there wasn't even a tenth to
> make that decision!
>
> Second, if we do so, we then need to figure out whether we want to
> still call it RSS (which could create some confusion in the
> marketplace) or something else. The main reason behind this is to
> clear up the air so that if that spec were to evolve, we can all
> agree on it.
>
> Third, we would need to define what goes in and what does not. That's
> a major piece of work. As part of this, we need to assess the
> membership's view on complexity. Where do we draw the line. Some of
> us are better versed at software development than others so the line
> has to be drawn somewhere but without your consideration
>
> Fourth, we might want to create an evangelism sub-group to convince
> the big players in software (the usual suspects: Microsoft, Netscape,
> Oracle, IBM, Sun, etc...) to integrate this in their software
> offering. That group should also be involved in evangelizing to the
> big boys of content (traditional media and large online content
> players) about the benefits of RSS (or whatever we call the new spec)
> and why they should support it.
>
> Last but not least here: this is an open forum and we are trying to
> define a standard. There are a few times in your internet career
> where you get a chance to do so. Much like an election, some people
> will gripe after a standard has been defined. However, it is my view
> that your right to gripe is annuled if you do not get involved. In
> other words, it's easy for people to stand aside, not make any
> decision either way, and then complain about the results. While there
> are some disagreements between the people who are exchanging emails
> on this list and others (see the whole battle between the pro-RDF and
> anti-RDF groups as a prime example), those people are trying to push
> the standard in one way or another. If you don't get involved, then
> you might end up with something you really don't like.
>
> As you can see, there is a lot of work here and it will affect you
> one way or another. Please get involved! I've created a few polls on
> the egroups site (http://www.egroups.com/polls/syndication) to cover
> some of what I talked about here. All the polls are anonymous so no
> one will know what you voted for but it will make it easier for us to
> assess in which direction to go. Please vote, it will only take you
> less than 5 minutes and could make a lot of difference.
>
> Allright, end of public service message and general bitching. Let's
> get going!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>