Re: Re: [RSS2-Support] Re: RSS 2.0 amendments process?

great message, bill.  do you have docs or site references on how to make
the e-donkey stuff work?

elijah



On Thu, 2 Oct 2003, Bill Kearney wrote:

> Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2003 12:31:44 -0400
> From: Bill Kearney <[email protected]>
> Reply-To: [email protected]
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: [syndication] Re: [RSS2-Support] Re: RSS 2.0 amendments process?
>
> > > You could always consider using .cab or .zip archive type files.
> > > Windows 2000
> > > and XP directly support using them from the filesystem as transparent
> > > folders
> > > (up to a point).  They are an extra processing step but consider that
> > > they also
> > > offer the ability to pass along filesystem hierarchy information.
> >
> > To much of a "workaround". Transparency is important. I just need
> > multiple attachments like any self respecting email can handle for the
> > last decade. Is that too much to ask? ;)
>
> Well, using e-mail programs as an example of the value behind attachments isn't
> exactly a ringing endorsement.  Look at all the insanity attachments have
> caused!  Viruses, malicious executables and the like.  Ugh, that's quite a mess.
>
> Given how neatly .zip archive handling is integrated these days there's really
> not much excuse for not using them.  Of course they will require the reader
> program take additional steps but so would mutliple enclosure elements.  I'm not
> saying multiple enclosures is a bad idea.  I'm suggesting that using archives
> might help avoid a whole range of /other/ problems at the same time.
>
> It would be greatly helpful to have a table of 'valid' MIME types that are
> supported by enclosures.  Best to act proactively to help reader programs
> understand how to properly go about dealing with things like executables,
> archives and other types.
>
> Granted, this raises the hassle of how to deal with a zip file that contains a
> media file or multiple media files.
>
> The original intent of enclosures was to push big Quicktime movies out to
> desktops.  The idea was that the desktop running Radio Userland would be left on
> overnight (ignoring the waste of electricity /this/ causes) and would then go
> get the data without bogging down the users actual live use of their network
> connection.  It's a good idea, perhaps a little poorly thought out though.  But
> it worked at the time and made for a cool demo hack.
>
> It may well be time to look into larger delivery issues instead of trying to
> force this upon the enclosure element.
>
> Stuff like using ed2k:// urls is one example.
>
> "ed2k://|file|index.rdf|12290|b3bab55a59d062133a6d48d87b5a8b0e|"
>
> That'll get you a copy of my RSS feed via eDonkey.  If you fire up eDonkey and
> give it that URL you should be able to have it (eventually) download you a copy
> of my feed.
>
> Other p2p systems could be employed as well.  Using them, however, raises a
> number of issues that would probably need to be discussed.  Stuff like
> determining current and/or latest version, authentication, naming conventions,
> etc.  But it can be done.  All it takes is for a reader program to make use of
> it's host operating system's ability to transport the data.  If the app is
> hard-coded to do only http transfers then you're screwed.  It's a whole lot
> better to use the OS transports as you get all their development goodness along
> with it.
>
> This really isn't an RSS2 issue, perhaps it should be discussed in another group
> like the syndication list?  No need to yank the RSS2 focus off into this area if
> other lists are better suited.
>
> -Bill Kearney
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/