Nouns and verbs
John doesn't get it. Sterling does. It took Sean ten minutes to figure it out. Doug sees the future. Giulio is asking the right questions.
Perhaps it is time for another essay. A short one, this time.
Danny - let's focus on the first one first. Do you really believe that every XML document which conforms to the schema you mentioned will be accepted as valid by the RSS validator? Or by the majority of aggregators out there?
Posted by Sam Ruby at
XSS?
Sam Ruby has written a new essaylet on Noun vs. Verb: Perhaps it is time for another essay. A short one, this time. Here's a quote from his essay, emphasis mine: RSS could benefit from an explicit schema. RSS could benefit by more explicit...Excerpt from Matt Croydon::postneo at
"RSS could benefit from an explicit schema."
http://purl.org/rss/1.0/schema.rdf
"RSS could benefit by more explicit rules defining whether HTML is allowed in titles or relative links are allowed in descriptions."
I agree this needs revision following the growth of blogging, but there are existing explicit rules in RSS 1.0, many of which follow from existing RDF and XML specs.
"RSS could benefit from a more clear separation of metadata from data."
<content:encoded> for content data, or a URL if it's remote, everything else is meta - what could be more explicit?
"RSS could benefit from an ability to explicitly mark what items must be understood, and which are optional."
Not sure what you mean by items here.
Posted by Danny at