* Bob Wyman [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-05-22 08:05]:
I'll be making a presentation on Tuesday which will include a
slide on how Atom improves on RSS. If you have any thoughts on
this subject, I would appreciate hearing them.
I think the main attractions are pretty clear:
Thoroughly specified
Off the top of my head
* Less ambiguous
* Broader solution space
* Defined extensibility model
* Defined encryption and digital signature support
* Support for additional content types and scenarios (e.g. linked
content as opposed to embedded)
Will be interested in seeing the final list
* Bob Wyman [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-05-22 01:52-0400]
I'll be making a presentation on Tuesday which will include a slide on how
Atom improves on RSS. If you have any thoughts on this subject, I would
appreciate hearing them.
Which version of RSS? the RDF and non-RDF strands have pretty
Bob Wyman wrote:
Ill be making a presentation on Tuesday which will include a slide on
how Atom improves on RSS. If you have any thoughts on this subject, I
would appreciate hearing them
Much of the following is still relevant:
http://intertwingly.net/slides/2003/xmlconf/
I'm not certain
This has been an experiment...
I've got lots of thoughts on why Atom is an improvement over RSS but
I am constantly amazed that people are able to continue making the claim
that Atom offers little that RSS doesn't already support. Certainly, Winer
and the Microsoft crowd make that claim
Bob Wyman wrote:
This has been an experiment...
I've got lots of thoughts on why Atom is an improvement over RSS but
I am constantly amazed that people are able to continue making the claim
that Atom offers little that RSS doesn't already support. Certainly, Winer
and the Microsoft
On 5/22/05, Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...your effort to create a concise list is very much appreciated
Here's one for RSS1: the Dublin Core module required to approach
Atom's core capabilities is extremely poorly defined. It doesn't even
commit to a string literal for fields like
