* Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-05-16 16:10]: > Mark Nottingham wrote: > >Thanks, Roger. After looking over the links that Randy and > >others kindly forwarded, consulting with the AD, and hearing > >nothing from Dave, it looks like we'll go with this link. > > Did you check Dave's weblog? He's recently restored, and is > actively promoting, an alternate link: > > http://www.scripting.com/stories/2007/04/30/wikipediaEditing.html > > These dueling versions of the RSS 2.0 specification differ in > minor details (e.g., range of skipHours), major features > (permissability namespaced attributes on existing RSS > elements), and roadmap.
So evidence confirms experience anew: RSS always has involved politics and always will. I propose that this spec stay out of it. To me it does not seem reasonable to take a political stand on behalf of the reader. So if conceivable, include both links (with a caveat lector if necessary). Is that a possibility? Regards, -- Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>
