RE: Re: RSS 2.0 is it official ?
"Hammond, Tony" <t.hammond-F/0MNWz/[email protected]> Mon, 4 Apr 2005 11:31:55 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.syndication.rss.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hi Bill: Whoops! Just have to take a little bit of an exception here. :) RSS 1.0 is not merely "soldiering on" - but IMO (or rather IOO) is becoming ever more the mainstream - especially within STM publishing (sorry, that's Science, Technology and Medicine Publishing) - where metadata matters. See our paper (if you didn't already): http://www.dlib.org/dlib/december04/hammond/12hammond.html But more importantly look at some of the players who are now fielding RSS 1.0: NPG (Nature), IOP (Institute of Physics), AIP (American Institute of Pysics), APS (American Physical Society), Ingenta, Extenza, IUCr (International Union of Crystallography), OUP (Oxford University Press), BMC (BioMed Central), National Geographic, New Scientist, etc, etc. And it's growing. Sorry, guys, but metadata _does_ matter. That's why we need RSS 1.0. :~) Cheers, Tony Tony Hammond New Technology, Nature Publishing Group 4 Crinan Street, London N1 9XW, UK tel:+44-20-7843-4659 mailto:t.hammond-F/0MNWz/[email protected] > -----Original Message----- > From: Bill Kearney [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: 03 April 2005 19:20 > To: [email protected] > Subject: [RSS-DEV] Re: RSS 2.0 is it official ? > > > > > > No, the only offical format is version 1.0. The 2.0 mess was > a hack foisted on the market by a developer and is now > foundering without support. Meanwhile 1.0 soldiers on. > > All readers, at this point, support all versions including > the emerging atom format. > > If you want a semantically intelligent and well-supported > format you'd do well to consider 1.0. > > -Bill Kearney > Syndic8.com > > > > I will start a RSS on my website. But I'm wondering if v1.0 is the > > only official version released ? What about the 2.0 specs > released by > > http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss. Is it credible ? It has just > > been published on a blog, not on an official channel like W3. > > > > And does all the RSS Reader understand the 2.0 release ? > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > ******************************************************************************** DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is confidential and should not be used by anyone who is not the original intended recipient. If you have received this e-mail in error please inform the sender and delete it from your mailbox or any other storage mechanism. Neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its agents accept liability for any statements made which are clearly the sender's own and not expressly made on behalf of Macmillan Publishers Limited or one of its agents. Please note that neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its agents accept any responsibility for viruses that may be contained in this e-mail or its attachments and it is your responsibility to scan the e-mail and attachments (if any). No contracts may be concluded on behalf of Macmillan Publishers Limited or its agents by means of e-mail communication. Macmillan Publishers Limited Registered in England and Wales with registered number 785998 Registered Office Brunel Road, Houndmills, Basingstoke RG21 6XS ******************************************************************************** Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rss-dev/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/