Lists Home |
Date Index |
On Feb 2, 2004, at 3:29 PM, Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
> Is RSS 2.0 push or pull? If pull,
> it's the safe bet.
Well, the whole point of RSS 2.0 [obligatory disclaimer -- I stay close
enough to the food fight to be entertained, but not close enough to get
dirty, so I may be missing something] was to support namespaces so that
arbitrary extensions were possible. I have no idea whether those
extensions were geek push or customer pull, but it inevitably ran afoul
of the "namespace thread virus," which led to a new round of the food
fight, which led to Atom.
I'd guess that RSS 0.91 is the safe bet if customers are pulling for
plain old ordinary news feeds. Some of the ugly problems with it, such
as escaping HTML with CDATA Sections, are still around in Atom, last I
Joshua Allen says:
> Why anyone who cared about RDF would abandon a perfectly good
> format in favor of a format that "might one day work great with RDF"
is beyond me."
One reason might be that the convergence of the SemanticWeb/RDF
foodfight and the RSS foodfight creates a Perfect Food Storm which any
sensible person would stay away from :-) Seriously, this is
ultimately about politics and power and personalities, not technology.
Anything one can say about the irrationality of it applies many times
over to Windows vs Linux, XSDL vs RELAX NG, .NET vs J2EE, C# vs Java,
WSDL vs REST, XAML vs XUL, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. Why should paying
customers care about any of that? Lots of reasons, not all of them
good, but not all of them bad.