[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: rss regularis(z)ation

• To: xml-dev <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: rss regularis(z)ation
• From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>
• Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2003 14:43:38 -0400
• In-reply-to: <004301c34fac$66cfced0$a000a8c0@SeairthA31>
• References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030721174702.02b88368@p...> <004301c34fac$66cfced0$a000a8c0@SeairthA31>
• User-agent: Opera7.10/Win32 M2 build 2840

On Mon, 21 Jul 2003 13:20:37 -0400, Seairth Jacobs <seairth@s...> 
wrote:

> Take a look at the following:
>
> http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/advisoryBoard
> http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/
>
> I doubt you will see RSS handed over to W3C, OASIS, or whomever...

Right.  The W3C is probably far too slow moving for the RSS community, and 
few of them are members.  But more importantly, the W3C works by a 
consensus-driven process.  The Browser Wars were bloodless, chivalric 
skirmishes compared to the RSS vs/+ Pie/Necho/Atom/whatever wars. I don't 
remember anyone's addictions or mental illnesses being brought up in DOM 
Level 1 debates, anyway <duck>.

Their best bet IMHO is the IETF, where "rough consensus and running code" 
speak louder than money and affiliation AFAIK.  

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: rss regularis(z)ation
    • From: Tim Bray <tbray@t...>

• References:
  • rss regularis(z)ation
    • From: Dave Pawson <dpawson@n...>
  • Re: rss regularis(z)ation
    • From: "Seairth Jacobs" <seairth@s...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Must SOAP-based array types be insufficiently validatable?
• Next by Date: Re: rss regularis(z)ation
• Previous by thread: Re: rss regularis(z)ation
• Next by thread: Re: rss regularis(z)ation
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread