[JoeGermuska] After reading Dave Winer's [WWW]Philosophy in re RSS 2.0 and Mark Pilgrim's [WWW]Leave RSS alone I retract this suggestion. I don't know how to do "strikethrough" in this Wiki but the following three paragraphs should be disregarded.

Seriously, I think now that the NameItEchoConflict has arisen, thought should be given to simply calling this RSS version 3.0.

I read much of the debate over the weekend about whether or not Echo is a good idea, and it seems to me like most of the arguments are at a level removed from the actual technology. Furthermore, the ConceptualModel is not so different from earlier versions of RSS that it really insists on having a new name. The cost of educating people (at least, the ones who aren't following this discussion now) about a name shift would be pretty high, for what appears right now to be not too much gain.

I think the case has been made ([WWW]example) that RSS 2.0 has limitations; just get Dave Winer to admit that he was hasty to [WWW]declare RSS frozen and move on with the implementation.

[TomasJogin] -1 That didn't work too well with RSS 1.0, did it? Assuming we want to honor the RSS 2.0 spec, naming it RSS 3.0 is not even an option. We want a clean break, restart, no technical or political baggage, remember?

[GrantCarpenter] -1 There's already an RSS 3.0 out there anyway. Not really adopted, but someone's made tracks there already.

[JoshJacobs RefactorOK] -1 this is supposed to be more encompassing than a feed format, it's supposed to be specs for data and API's related to weblogging and syndication.

[SimonJessey] I know [WWW]Aaron Swartz had a go at it, although I think seriousness went out the window a bit.

[DannyAyers] Copied from ProjectNews 2003-07-24 Two articles have been published at [WWW] They talk about how RSS may be extended and describe techniques that are effectively prior art for extension modules in Echo.

The first, [WWW]Why Choose RSS 1.0? by TonyHammond, gives some historical background to RSS 1.0, RSS 2.0, and the EchoProject. It then looks at how the PRISM module for RSS 1.0 can provide the citation material required for scientific publication. The RSS module is currently deployed by the journal, [WWW]Nature; you can see their feed of feeds: [WWW]

The second article [WWW]Extending RSS by DannyAyers looks at "the nuts and bolts" of writing an RSS extension and how RDF Schema can be used to add meaning with relatively little effort. It begins with a focus on RSS 1.0 and later shows how the same techniques can be used with RSS 2.0.

[DeveloperDude] It's not RSS 3.0, but I'm going to try to bring RSS and Atom together in a new project called PaSS. Wish me luck.