RE: [syndication] Total confusion in RSS-Land

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

The only problem I see with your arguments is that you never talk about
FORKing, giving another name to RSS 1.0. Both groups could "live 
amicably" if the "1.0" group would just agree on that. 

(I believe that even Dave would be more polite after that.)

And it makes sense. Even if you do not understand why other people find
the RDF solution complex, they still DO. And RSS 0.92 will be much 
closer to 0.91 than 1.0 is. Is up to 1.0 to get another name.

Respecting other people's opinions also has to do with accepting what 
you can't understand or that you even find technically worse.
(I know it is not always easy.)


This is what is missing from the "1.0" side.


I would like the RDF version to be successful. That gives people a 
choice and I may even use it in the future.

But trying to be successful by taking over the RSS name is taking away 
the right to choose a simpler option.

Please, just get another name and lets work. After all this mess, it is
sure that the RDF line will not go unnoticed anymore. (With the 
defenders it has, it wouldn't anyway. Isn't it?)


Have fun,
Paulo Gaspar


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ken MacLeod [mailto:ken@bitsko.slc.ut.us]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2000 19:16
> 
> I wrote:
> 
> > It is quite apparent that nearly everyone wants both groups to live
> > amicably, and even share ideas where appropriate, and let the market
> > decide which format they want to use.
> 
> If anyone besides Dave feels I'm being totally off-base in my
> responses or my participation in general, please feel free to drop me
> an email and I'll give you my phone number or an IRC channel where we
> can talk about it.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
>   -- Ken