[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- To: XML Developers List <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
- Subject: Re: [xml-dev] ANN: RSS 1.1
- From: David Megginson <david.megginson@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 10:45:46 -0500
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=PJKFLf6U82HW4KFAxJTlj0c8JEXr/3EZY5TYJm5NkUn0LpjpTCtLNHqZmOlMqJiBMINJcFHBnS3xHLJO3iMCPyVIAFB3fJGuC66gBtupiRtp7JsJ6idNKqWiDUQGcK24v2yDrYCJS41QjikoINtD3dYRaMPnyHGdcCRDAg6Cs7U=
- In-reply-to: <41ED1D5A.7070909@infomesh.net>
- References: <41ED1D5A.7070909@infomesh.net>
- Reply-to: David Megginson <david.megginson@gmail.com>
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 14:29:46 +0000, Sean B. Palmer
<sean+rss@infomesh.net> wrote:
> This specification has been developed by a group of RSS 1.0 users
> including myself who sought not just to resolve the various bugs therein
> but also to improve the integrity of the specification in general, and
> provide RELAX NG and RDF Schemata.
Thanks for the announcement. Those of us who don't belong to the
rss-dev group would be grateful for a bit of history. What made you
decide to make another RSS fork? Is the rss-dev group responsible for
RSS 1.x inactive or unresponsive, or are there some fundamental
architectural disagreements?
Thanks, and all the best,
David
--
http://www.megginson.com/
|
