Comments on: Spymasters choose Atom over RSS http://inkblots.markwoodman.com/2006/09/22/spymasters-choose-atom-over-rss/ Completely Messing the Point - Notes on cool tech, including RSS and Atom. May contain humor. Sun, 23 Nov 2008 14:53:54 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.5 by: Randy Charles Morin http://inkblots.markwoodman.com/2006/09/22/spymasters-choose-atom-over-rss/#comment-279 Sat, 30 Sep 2006 14:12:43 +0000 http://inkblots.markwoodman.com/2006/09/22/spymasters-choose-atom-over-rss/#comment-279 Just a note, RSS 2.0 is backwards compatible with RSS 0.9x. The idea was that you could continue using 0.9x and any parser that read 2.0 would work for 0.9x. No deprecation was necessary. Of course, that's not true of 1.0. Just a note, RSS 2.0 is backwards compatible with RSS 0.9x. The idea was that you could continue using 0.9x and any parser that read 2.0 would work for 0.9x. No deprecation was necessary. Of course, that’s not true of 1.0.

]]> by: Mark Woodman http://inkblots.markwoodman.com/2006/09/22/spymasters-choose-atom-over-rss/#comment-276 Fri, 22 Sep 2006 21:21:17 +0000 http://inkblots.markwoodman.com/2006/09/22/spymasters-choose-atom-over-rss/#comment-276 You have a good point about the abuse of Atom 0.3, Randy. Still, Atom 0.3 was always labeled a beta and not for production use. Atom 1.0 deprecated 0.3 quite specifically. I hesitate to blame a specification for the people who do not abide by it. (HTML is a great spec, but we don't blame it for people who write invalid/deprecated HTML.) On the other hand, RSS 2.0 does not state, "All other versions are now deprecated." There is no migration path in RSS, just multiple formats from which to choose. The issue of too many variations could be solved with a deprecation statement in RSS 2.0... if only it weren't frozen. Everybody knows I love RSS. I just wish there were ways to address the shortcomings in the specification itself. You have a good point about the abuse of Atom 0.3, Randy.

Still, Atom 0.3 was always labeled a beta and not for production use. Atom 1.0 deprecated 0.3 quite specifically. I hesitate to blame a specification for the people who do not abide by it. (HTML is a great spec, but we don’t blame it for people who write invalid/deprecated HTML.)

On the other hand, RSS 2.0 does not state, “All other versions are now deprecated.” There is no migration path in RSS, just multiple formats from which to choose. The issue of too many variations could be solved with a deprecation statement in RSS 2.0… if only it weren’t frozen.

Everybody knows I love RSS. I just wish there were ways to address the shortcomings in the specification itself.

]]> by: Randy Charles Morin http://inkblots.markwoodman.com/2006/09/22/spymasters-choose-atom-over-rss/#comment-275 Fri, 22 Sep 2006 20:55:42 +0000 http://inkblots.markwoodman.com/2006/09/22/spymasters-choose-atom-over-rss/#comment-275 Atom 0.3 accounts for 89% of Atom feeds, is not capatible with Atom 1.0, is deprecated and all Atom 0.3 feeds are invalid according to both mentioned validators. As such, saying a problem is that RSS has multiple versions, without saying the same of Atom, indicates a clear bias on the part of the authors. At least RSS 2.0 makes up 87% of RSS feeds. Data from Rmail http://www.r-mail.org/blog/?guid=20060803093810 Atom 0.3 accounts for 89% of Atom feeds, is not capatible with Atom 1.0, is deprecated and all Atom 0.3 feeds are invalid according to both mentioned validators. As such, saying a problem is that RSS has multiple versions, without saying the same of Atom, indicates a clear bias on the part of the authors. At least RSS 2.0 makes up 87% of RSS feeds.

Data from Rmail
http://www.r-mail.org/blog/?guid=20060803093810

]]> by: scott http://inkblots.markwoodman.com/2006/09/22/spymasters-choose-atom-over-rss/#comment-274 Fri, 22 Sep 2006 20:17:07 +0000 http://inkblots.markwoodman.com/2006/09/22/spymasters-choose-atom-over-rss/#comment-274 The migration to Atom is inevitable. Dave might be able to bully his clueless blogging buddies to indulge his ever expanding ego but the facts speak for themselves. Atom provides developers what they need to provide their users stable, secure and usable content syndication infrastructure. RSS 2.0 does not. It's good to see that ROME is getting its props. Well done. The migration to Atom is inevitable. Dave might be able to bully his clueless blogging buddies to indulge his ever expanding ego but the facts speak for themselves. Atom provides developers what they need to provide their users stable, secure and usable content syndication infrastructure. RSS 2.0 does not.

It’s good to see that ROME is getting its props. Well done.

]]>