[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [syndication] shared feed lists
- To: syndication@yahoogroups.com
- Subject: Re: [syndication] shared feed lists
- From: "Ross Wm. Rader" <ross@tucows.com>
- Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 09:48:33 -0400
- In-reply-to: <02ac01c39259$0b4a7700$200ca8c0@wkearney.com>
- Organization: Tucows Inc.
- References: <159101c391d7$7efe0a40$6401a8c0@murphy3> <3F8B6561.1000409@bitworking.org> <177a01c3924c$4500dc80$6401a8c0@murphy3> <3F8BF649.3080801@bitworking.org> <182301c39256$09fc7a90$6401a8c0@murphy3> <02ac01c39259$0b4a7700$200ca8c0@wkearney.com>
- Reply-to: ross@tucows.com
- User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20030924 Thunderbird/0.3
On 10/14/2003 9:42 AM Bill Kearney noted that:
Why is using a <head> section <link> tag not sufficient?
It doesn't seem to make sense to force someone to pull a file that they
may or may not want (and may or may not exist) in order to find out
where something, possibly completely unrelated, lives.
I don't mind using that approach when related HTML exists, but as it
relates to my implementation, it doesn't always exist and I don't see a
clearcut reason why we should force it to exist.
On the other hand, we're doing exactly what this proposes to solve for
using OCS and a predictable file location. Happy to extend the discovery
mechanism (easy) but not too crazy about having to take another format
into consideration on behalf of my users.
Why isn't OCS "good enough" to do this?
--
-rwr
"Don't be too timid and squeamish about your actions.
All life is an experiment.
The more experiments you make the better."
- Ralph Waldo Emerson
Got Blog? http://www.blogware.com
My Blogware: http://www.byte.org