On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 01:04:13 -0500, Bob Wyman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> Dare Obasanjo wrote:
> >*unsubscribed*
> 
> Neither that nor the provocation that lead to it was useful.
> 
> Dare's participation may have been exasperating at times, nonetheless, it
> was useful. We've lost something here... 

A challenge, perhaps?

Quoting Dare from earlier in the thread:
[[
On the other hand, there isn't much I want from an XML
syndication format that can't be done with one of the
existing flavors of RSS (1.0 or 2.0) and extensions.
So I won't waste your time listing the features I'd
like to see in a syndication format.
]]

That is exactly what I found exasperating, that his sights were set on
what could be done already, not what could be fixed or *improved* over
1.0 and 2.0. People like Dare, Don Park and others are unlikely to see
much benefit as long the group aims merely for
lowest-common-denominator RSS 2.0, patched and rebranded.

Ok, I think it would take considerably more than a months of Sundays
to say, persuade Dare of the benefits of the RDF model or whatever, he
has a strong naysaying streak. But if at the end of the day this WG
doesn't come up with a deliverable that Dare could confidently take to
MS and say "this is much better" then we've missed something.

Cheers,
Danny. 

-- 

http://dannyayers.com

Reply via email to