From: Dave Winer (dave@userland.com)
Date: Tue Aug 15 2000 - 11:31:34 PDT
Edd, I chose to discuss this on FoRK because I consider it neutral. I don't
want to in any way interfere with the RDF folk going forward, and I don't
want to join their group. I am busy, and don't believe in what they're
doing. I would also appreciate a response to this question. Where do we go
from here? How do you expect me to continue to work in RSS, or do you? If
so, state it clearly, so everyone else can see how you process this stuff.
Dave
----- Original Message -----
From: "Edd Dumbill" <edd@usefulinc.com>
To: <fork@xent.ics.uci.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2000 11:18 AM
Subject: Re: Why is RDF hard?
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2000 at 10:53:20AM -0700, Dave Winer wrote:
> > Edd, I disagree that RSS should become RDF.
> >
> > Now, where do we go from there?
> >
> > I acknowledge your right to have your ideas tested in the market. But
doing
> > it this way, by taking the name RSS 1.0, that doesn't leave much room
for
> > difference of opinion, does it?
> >
> > In other words, if you're right, and RDF is the right way to go, it
should
> > succeed on its own merits not by taking the name of something that has
been
> > successful on its own without any help from RDF.
>
> But RSS 0.9 was RDF, and that was the way they wanted to go, see
> http://my.netscape.com/publish/help/futures.html
>
> As I understand it, several of the RDF folk then left Netscape. One of
> them, R.V. Guha, is a co-author of the new proposal.
>
> And it is actually touted as a "proposal". One of the work items could
> well be "change the name", why not post to the new rss-dev mailing list
> to propose that!
>
> -- Edd
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Aug 15 2000 - 11:40:40 PDT