[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Tim Bray wrote:
> [...] someone said they needed a schema for the son-of-RSS work, and I
> volunteered. [...] (Details at
> http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/07/09/PieSchema01
Thank you for taking the initiative! This was sorely needed.
> but it's not a very interesting schema).
I for one think it's very interesting indeed! I've been
trying to grasp the essence of not-echo, but lacking a
concise description it's been a rough slog across the Wiki
and dozens of weblogs (and altogether _too much_ Viewing Source).
The schema helps a lot.
BTW, regarding:
| The following need removal forthwith, simply because
| previous generations syndication technology got by without them just fine,
| and we're not here to invent stuff:
|
| subtitle Exactly what can we not do if we don't have this?
| What prior art demonstrates its necessity?
I thought the analogy "title, subtitle, summary" == "head, deck, lead"
provided a compelling use case, with ample precedent in newspaper
and magazine publishing. Most people probably won't use 'subtitle',
but it could be very important for those who can make use of it.
Another thing to consider: since one of the use cases is
single-author weblogs, it might be worthwhile to allow
'author' and 'contributor' as direct children of a 'feed'.
But I'm not really involved in the blogging world other than
as an occasional reader, so take this for what it's worth.
--Joe English
jenglish@flightlab.com
|
