Hi



What do people think about Dave Winer's plan [1] to issue RSS 2.0

[2] tomorrow?



Is it just a matter of fixing the details as Ben Hammersley implies

[3] (I could add internationalisation to that list...) or is there a

far bigger _fundamental_ problem with the 'benevolent dictator'

appoach to the production of web standards?



I've copied this to rss-dev for info but please follow this up on

the syndication list [4] since cross-posting is bad and the rss-dev

list is not as broad-based as the syndication one :-)





Chris



[1] http://scriptingnews.userland.com/backissues/2002/09/09#attnSpecWonks



[2] http://backend.userland.com/rss



[3] http://rss.benhammersley.com/archives/001320.html



[4] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/syndication/

On Mon, 2002-09-09 at 19:50, Chris Croome wrote:

> Hi

>

> What do people think about Dave Winer's plan [1] to issue RSS 2.0

> [2] tomorrow?



Nothing :-)



> Is it just a matter of fixing the details as Ben Hammersley implies

> [3] (I could add internationalisation to that list...) or is there a

> far bigger _fundamental_ problem with the 'benevolent dictator'

> appoach to the production of web standards?



The need of open processes is a good enough reason IMO to pursue our

work in this (RSS 1.0) working group. And I think that it would be worth

even if we came out (and I don't think that it could be the case) to the

same spec word for word :-)



> I've copied this to rss-dev for info but please follow this up on

> the syndication list [4] since cross-posting is bad and the rss-dev

> list is not as broad-based as the syndication one :-)



I intend to focus on technical aspects and don't want to subscribe back

to the syndication list (I don't have the badwidth to do so).



Eric

--

Rendez-vous à Paris.

                           http://www.technoforum.fr/integ2002/index.html

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eric van der Vlist       http://xmlfr.org            http://dyomedea.com

(W3C) XML Schema ISBN:0-596-00252-1 http://oreilly.com/catalog/xmlschema

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Chris Croome wrote:



>Hi

>

>What do people think about Dave Winer's plan [1] to issue RSS 2.0

>[2] tomorrow?

>

>Is it just a matter of fixing the details as Ben Hammersley implies

>[3] (I could add internationalisation to that list...) or is there a

>far bigger _fundamental_ problem with the 'benevolent dictator'

>appoach to the production of web standards?

>

>

I hate to split semantic hairs, but RSS 0.9x and 2.0 are not web

standards, they are

proprietary formats of Userland. They were not developed in an open

fashion, nor are

they associated with any standards bodies. They are updated at one

persons whim.

They are not standards.



Now as far as the name RSS goes, that and the 0.9 spec were written by

Netscape and

then, ummm, taken over by Userland. Was that the right thing to do? Is

that nice behaviour?

It doesn't matter. Even if it did matter to someone that someone isn't

you unless you

work at Userland or Netscape, since the problem just ends up being a

tradename/trademark/copyright dispute between Userland and Netscape.

Just because Userland did that doesn't make it okay for everyone

to charge in and grab the RSS name. Now usually companies

will, after sheperding a format for a while, voluntarily turn over such

formats to

standards bodies to gain wider acceptance. Hell, even Microsoft has

submitted WSDL to

the W3C. Userland, as is their perogative, has decided not to do this.

It damages

the format but it is still their decision. So no, I don't care if

Userland issues

RSS 2.0 tomorrow, or RSS 3.0 next Thursday, or RSS 4.0 two years from

last Tuesday.



For the very same reasons I also do not consider RSS 1.0 a legitimate web

standard either. The rss-dev group took the name from Userland without

permission and

they are not associated with any standards group. Their claim to a

'standard' and the

RSS name are just as tenuous as Userlands.



My suggestion, just walk away from the name. We need to pick another

TLA, form a

new working group, get associated with a standards body, and never look

back.

But the most important thing is to pick a new TLA, might I suggest

Reader Documentation Format? ;-)



     -joe



--

http://bitworking.org

On Tue, 2002-09-10 at 03:48, Joe Gregorio wrote:



> I hate to split semantic hairs, but RSS 0.9x and 2.0 are not web

> standards, they are

> proprietary formats of Userland. They were not developed in an open

> fashion, nor are

> they associated with any standards bodies. They are updated at one

> persons whim.

.../...

> For the very same reasons I also do not consider RSS 1.0 a legitimate web

> standard either. The rss-dev group took the name from Userland without

> permission and

> they are not associated with any standards group.



Being picky I would say that even XML or HTML are not web standards

either: the W3C calls them "recommendations" because only ISO and its

national bodies can pretend to publish "standards".



I'd also like to answer about the name: if we have kept the name "RSS",

that's because we have in the WG people (well, at least one) who have

been been involved with its development at Netscape (ie before Userland

took it over) and that they thought it was important to keep this name

for RSS 1.0 which was in line with what they had in mind when they have

developed RSS 0.9.



I'd like also to highlight that we have an open and published policy and

that, unlike many web standards (or pseudo standards) organizations

anyone can ask to become a WG member and that all our discussions are

run in public and archived. Thus, if I do not pretend that we are a web

standard organization, I do pretend that RSS 1.0 is an open (or free if

you prefer) web specification, which the other flavors of RSS are not.



Eric

--

Rendez-vous à Paris.

                           http://www.technoforum.fr/integ2002/index.html

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eric van der Vlist       http://xmlfr.org            http://dyomedea.com

(W3C) XML Schema ISBN:0-596-00252-1 http://oreilly.com/catalog/xmlschema

------------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> I'd also like to answer about the name: if we have kept the name "RSS",

> that's because we have in the WG people (well, at least one) who have

> been been involved with its development at Netscape (ie before Userland

> took it over) and that they thought it was important to keep this name

> for RSS 1.0 which was in line with what they had in mind when they have

> developed RSS 0.9.

>



true: see

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rss-dev/message/1136



for Dan Brickley's comprehensive and referenced summary of the origins

of the RSS name which he sent in the previous round of discussions.



Libby

On 10 Sep 2002, Eric van der Vlist wrote:



> On Tue, 2002-09-10 at 03:48, Joe Gregorio wrote:

>

> > I hate to split semantic hairs, but RSS 0.9x and 2.0 are not web

> > standards, they are

> > proprietary formats of Userland. They were not developed in an open

> > fashion, nor are

> > they associated with any standards bodies. They are updated at one

> > persons whim.

> .../...

> > For the very same reasons I also do not consider RSS 1.0 a legitimate web

> > standard either. The rss-dev group took the name from Userland without

> > permission and

> > they are not associated with any standards group.

>

> Being picky I would say that even XML or HTML are not web standards

> either: the W3C calls them "recommendations" because only ISO and its

> national bodies can pretend to publish "standards".

>

> I'd also like to answer about the name: if we have kept the name "RSS",

> that's because we have in the WG people (well, at least one) who have

> been been involved with its development at Netscape (ie before Userland

> took it over) and that they thought it was important to keep this name

> for RSS 1.0 which was in line with what they had in mind when they have

> developed RSS 0.9.

>

> I'd like also to highlight that we have an open and published policy and

> that, unlike many web standards (or pseudo standards) organizations

> anyone can ask to become a WG member and that all our discussions are

> run in public and archived. Thus, if I do not pretend that we are a web

> standard organization, I do pretend that RSS 1.0 is an open (or free if

> you prefer) web specification, which the other flavors of RSS are not.



Yep, I don't care to get into the debate about what counts as a

'standard', but I do feel that the RSS development group is admirably

open, and that this fits well with the open, decentralist technical path

we have chosen with RSS 1.0.



Dan

The rss-dev group took the name from Userland without

> permission and



No, the RSS-DEV group took the name RDF Site Summary from Netscape. If

Netscape complained I think it would only be fair to at least consider

changing the name, otherwise there is no more conflict than there is with

Repetitive Stress Syndrome, The Royal Statistical Society, Relay Spam

Stopper, or that political group in India whose name I forget and can't

really be bothered looking up.

Quite. What is more, the name RSS was never given by Netscape to

Userland in the first place. It was appropriated by Userland when they

wrote up the RSS 0.91 specification after Netscape had removed their

documentation from their servers. RSS was always an open standard,

Userland's efforts to trademark the name notwithstanding.



On Tuesday, Sep 10, 2002, at 10:36 Europe/London, Jon Hanna wrote:



> The rss-dev group took the name from Userland without

>> permission and

>

> No, the RSS-DEV group took the name RDF Site Summary from Netscape. If

> Netscape complained I think it would only be fair to at least consider

> changing the name, otherwise there is no more conflict than there is

> with

> Repetitive Stress Syndrome, The Royal Statistical Society, Relay Spam

> Stopper, or that political group in India whose name I forget and can't

> really be bothered looking up.

>

>

> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

> rss-dev-unsubscribe@egroups.com

>

>

>

> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to

> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

>