From: Dave Winer (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Sep 05 2000 - 03:56:17 PDT
After sending the last email, I re-read the survey, and expunged some
Daveisms to more accurately reflect the advocacy. There were only three
votes at the time I made the changes.
Here's the revised survey text.
<response id="choice1">It's fine exactly as it is, don't change a
<response id="choice2">Add a few elements so it can become richer. It's a
maturing format with a large installed base, it needs to grow slowly to fit
the needs of content developers and aggregators, but keep it simple, that's
the biggest thing it's got going for it.</response>
<response id="choice3">Add "semantic sugar" for XML Namespaces so
developers can use the Dublin Core and create their own vocabularies. This
is a good thing to do because it avoids silly innovations like the "blink"
tag, as happened in the browser wars between Microsoft and
<response id="choice4">Add namespaces as above and add required elements
that make it part of RDF, so developers can build new kinds of databases and
search engines that will do dramatic new things, not just with syndicated
Web content, but all kinds of information.</response>
<response id="choice5">I don't have an opinion about how RSS should
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Sep 05 2000 - 04:04:43 PDT