(I am sending this to RSS-DEV and to Syndication in
hope of resolving the naming issue once and for all).

My stance is that what is now known as RSS 1.0 needs a
new name. It could have an "R" in it to recursively flag
its RSS heritage, but versioning the RSS brand is a very
poor way to show the outside world that there are really
two distinct efforts here. It will only lead to confusion.

The (very small) marketing side of me says that two distinct
names are going to each have better brand recognition than
a single name qualified with something that denotes two
different approaches to solving some of the same problems.

I'll suggest some names (only half tongue in cheek) for
RSS 1.0:

RDR - RSS Done Right
RWN - RSS With Namespaces
RTX - RSS That's eXtensible
RNR - RSS 0.9 is Not RSS 1.0
RDN - RSS With Different Name

I'm sure you all can do much better.

It is not an option to rename RSS 0.9x. People already
call it RSS and I see no reason to suddenly make their
statements ambiguous.

Jeff;

-----Original Message-----
From: Ken MacLeod [mailto:ken@...]
Sent: Monday, November 06, 2000 9:45 PM
To: rss-dev@egroups.com
Subject: Re: [RSS-DEV] RSS 1.0 Release Candidate 1 (DRAFT)


"Jeff Barr" <jeff@...> writes:

> [Seth Russell writes:]
>
> > David King wrote:
> >
> > > Is anybody besides me concerned that the name of the standard
> > > was left up in the air? There was some discussion on the
> > > subject and even a poll (which had American-like voter turn
> > > out). However, the WG members as a whole never took a step up
> > > to definitively say what the name will/should be from here on
> > > out. I think something needs to be done prior to _any_ release.
> > > A WG vote or even a statement from the entire WG with their
> > > reasons for the selected name would be nice.
> >
> > I share this concern. It's beginning to look like the WG members
> > want just to sweep this issue under the table ... wish only that
> > it should go away. Well I for one think that sucks!
>
> I strongly encourage "you guys" (the WG) to come up with a good name
> for this before you release it. Once the cat is out of the bag in
> the form of a final spec there will be no further opportunity to
> change it. Without reopening the debate, it is only fair to all
> parties to adopt a new name instead of generating confusion
> byissuing something new called RSS.

It would be useful information to know where "you guys" (that would be
the IG and larger RSS community) stand on the proposal for both specs
keeping the RSS name and adopting version or branch names. Sort of
like "Jeep" is the name of that boxy four-wheel-drive vehicle and
"Wrangler", "CJ-5", and "CJ-7" are the model names of various
versions.

-- Ken

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
rss-dev-unsubscribe@egroups.com