It’s just data

Atom in Depth

slides

Linked to Summary

The link you provided is to the Summary page. Probably want to fix that to go to the first page[1].

[1] [link]



Emailed by Marsh, Drew at

Drew: Fixed!  Thanks.

Posted by Sam Ruby at

Sam Ruby's Atom Specification Slides Now Available

Sam Ruby has posted some slides detailing the ins and outs of the Atom specification. Personally, I like Atom a lot more than RSS because it's very explicit about its requirements. I've toyed with writing weblogging software (both server and client...

Excerpt from Drew's Blog at

Thanks, I followed most of that content without the context (although I wish I'd seen them presented).

Coming to this space late, and being only a newbie, it is nice to see the RSS cons and Atom solutions laid out. Interesting insights.

So, know of an Atom API in Python? I'd like to add this to Gump...

Posted by Adam Jack at

What software were those slides made in? Nice to see something other than just powerpoint or even HTMLized powerpoint. I was recently thinking this way.

Posted by Michael Fagan at

All Right, You Sold Me On Atom

I was very skeptical about this Atom business. I thought they were reinventing for reinvention's sake. At the very core,...... [more]

Trackback from Dichotomy's Purgatory

at

Adam,
Since  gump will probably only produce feeds and put embeded links (for auto-discovery) in the normal html pages, you probably don't need the a full AtomAPI. 
If you want to support trackbacks and comments on gump postings, then perhaps.

Posted by Nick Chalko at

Michael: here's the source to the slides - a few dozen lines of Perl, followed by the slides themselves in a wiki like format.

Posted by Sam Ruby at

The quoting of Dave Winer of scripting.com on markup in the title twice could be misinterpreted as an attack on Dave.  Therefore, I think it is a little distracting. Particularly the 2nd one seems truncated, in the originail it was followed by "but maybe this will cause problems."  and a request for comments.  Maybe you can use the first dave quote or the entire second dave quote and find another example of someone confused about markup in titles?  Up to you obviously.

Posted by Markup Maven Mavis Beacon at

Thanks. I like it.

Posted by Michael Fagan at

Sam, I've said this many times, but I guess I have to say it again.

It's not fair to treat what I write on Scripting News as if it were spec text. It's not a spec, it's a weblog. If I make a mistake, point it out or ask for clarification. To conclude that RSS is poorly specified based on something on my weblog is ridiculous.

Posted by Dave Winer at

Sam Ruby's (eagerly awaited) XML conf slides. Sam suggests that the ambiguities in RSS 2.0 also apply to RSS 1.0....... [more]

Trackback from Raw

at

These slides point out a number of places where the various RSS specs need clarification.  And I agree that such clarifications belong in the spec themselves, not on weblogs.

Posted by Sam Ruby at

I just want to be clear, you're misleading people into thinking my weblog is a spec. Not fair. End of that point. To say "and I agree".. well I didn't say what you said I agree with. Frustating.

Posted by Dave Winer at

I pointed out a number of ambiguities in the specs.  I pointed out a number of places where the ambiguities were discussed.  Discussed without resolution.

It has been my experience that most people can tell the difference between a spec and a discussion.

Posted by Sam Ruby at

I don't think Sam was wrong to use the examples, but as to the role of the blog material:
"I'm giving feedback to a RSS feed provider who is including markup in the titles of items. The spec is silent on whether this is allowed, so it must be allowed. "
Coming from the person that drafted the spec, that looks very much like clarification to me.

The only way to avoid these misunderstandings is to fix the spec. Or simply use a better one ;-)

Posted by Danny at

Was the presentation recorded (audio or video)? The slides are great, but it would be very helpful to see/hear the talk as well.

Posted by Steven Garrity at

Steven: as far as I know, the presentation wasn't recorded.  Sorry.

Posted by Sam Ruby at

Sam Ruby did a presentation on Atom. His slide show is here....

Excerpt from iBLOGthere4iM at

PaSS Issues

Issues raised over IM w/ a fellow Atomite. RSS Issues. The RSS issues are those raised here. PaSS does not currently address these issues, but may in future revisions. Setting aside of the Atom effort. PaSS will be embedded in Atom and requires the...

Excerpt from iBLOGthere4iM at

Atom 0.3 Roundup

There’s been a bit of activity and commentary the last couple of days regarding The Atom Project. Here’s a quick list: Mark Pilgrim does a great job of explaining what’s new in the 0.3 spec Sam Ruby has posted his...... [more]

Trackback from Weblog Hype

at

General comments: Excellent set of slides. I agree with Sam's point that people differentiate between spec and weblog commentary/speculation. Dave, you should be proud of what you've wrought ... but in my opinion y'all need to chill a little. Perhaps I'm missing something, but I never interpreted Sam's slides as a personal criticism, but that's definitely the feeling I get when I read your responses. Enuf said (I hope).

Now onto some of my other observations:

1. I looked at the atom.css used for Snellon's examples. Whether or not you should provide a style sheet for the XML is and will remain an open issue. However, it took me only two minutes to modify (augment) the css and change a test feed RSS2 compliant-feed to also render identically. What do I conclude from this ... well ... it would be a courtesy to show how it could work with pure vanilla RSS, non-standard feeds (MT's default format with it's mixture of RDF and RSS2 elements), and of course Atom. Styling XML should, imho, remain outside of any valid debate regarding specifications and spec improvements.

2. With regard to RSS specification clarifications ... the spec has a clear bias towards HTML and URLs. As an example, what if you wanted to provide you're AOL info? MSN? Groove? Would these be violations of RSS2 such that they'll be condemned by the original author of the spec?

This isn't a slam on RSS or Dave, but is meant to point out that as we move forward it may be possible that RSS is used as a format but the transport and/or access might not be used for Dave's original vision which I'll be presumptuous enough to state is "personal publishing". For example, what if I used RSS/RSS+ as a format for threaded discussions that will never be transported over HTTP. What if, yikes, RSS was the format for an Indigo message?

3. Another area that I have questions on is with regard to use of <enclosure>. My reading of the spec doesn't preclude multiple enclosures but it also doesn't state that there can be more than one. This is something that I'd hope Atom addresses.
If I've misread the spec, my apologies in advance.

Posted by phil at

Syndication gets forked?

Ah, while I was away Sam Ruby put up a bunch of info about Atom (the new syndication format that competes with RSS, both 1.0 and 2.0). Finally some answers as to what's better about Atom. I still wonder what would happen if Microsoft wrote those...

Excerpt from The Scobleizer Weblog at

Slides (HTML) from XML Conference 2003 by Sam Ruby......

Excerpt from Finally Atom at

Atom and the Power of the Human Voice

Sam Ruby has posted slides for Atom (hint: the slide are the link at the very top). Atom is a new syndication specification that competes with RSS 1.0 and RSS 2.0. Yikes! Still, I think Sam makes a good case why Atom is better. Robert Scoble asks...

Excerpt from Windley's Enterprise Computing Weblog at

Atom slides

Sam Ruby's slides from the XML conference.... [more]

Trackback from Neil's Smaller World

at

Reliable Syndication

After reading Sam's slides on Atom, Scoble posted three times about how syndication could evolve. Of course, Scoble has his Longhorn-colored glasses on. Dare pointed out that "The major problems with syndication today have little to do...

Excerpt from DevHawk at

"Atom in Depth" Presentation

Sam Ruby gave this presenation at the XML Conference last week, and it details the motivation for wanting to rev another syndication format. It more or less boils down to tightening up the spec so there's less ambiguity in what is allowed where in a feed. The presentation does a great job of comparing and contrasting how the existing specs (and psuedo-specs and spec interpretations) handle the different feed elements. One other thing I wanted to call attention to is the format of the presentation itself. The slides look beautiful in Mozilla, less so in IE 6.0, but do a View Source on a couple of those slides. Isn't that fabulous? Snaps for Sam Ruby for the awesome and appropriate use of CSS. Source: Sam Ruby: Atom in Depth...... [more]

Trackback from Dancing About Architecture

at

Sam Ruby's Atom Specification Slides Now Available

Sam Ruby has posted some slides detailing the ins and outs of the Atom specification. Personally, I like Atom a lot more than RSS because it's very explicit about its requirements. I've toyed with writing weblogging software (both server and client...

Excerpt from Drew's Blog at

Atom and the Power of the Human Voice

Sam Ruby has posted slides for Atom (hint: the slide are the link at the very top). Atom is a new syndication specification that competes with RSS 1.0 and RSS 2.0. Yikes! Still, I think Sam makes a good case why Atom is better. Robert Scoble asks...

Excerpt from Phil Windley: Blogging at

Atom and the Power of the Human Voice

Sam Ruby has posted slides for Atom (hint: the slide are the link at the very top).... [more]

Trackback from Windley's Enterprise Computing Weblog

at

Sam Ruby: Atom in Depth

[link]...

Excerpt from del.icio.us/tag/atom at

Add your comment