{ "attachments": [], "comments_archived": true, "date": "2003-07-07T16:40:13.000Z", "layout": "post", "title": "Is the magic in RSS, or in Syndication?", "wordpress_id": 438, "wordpress_slug": "syndications-formats", "wordpress_url": "http://www.decafbad.com/blog/?p=438", "year": "2003", "month": "07", "day": "07", "isDir": false, "slug": "syndications-formats", "type": "entry", "postName": "2003-07-07-syndications-formats", "html": "
\nTools will start to support necho as well as RSS. The formats will\ncoexist, just as RSS 0.91 and RDF and RSS 2.0 coexist\ntoday. Furthermore, this coexistence will be transparent, just like\ntoday. Over time, necho will, hopefully, become the standard. In the\nmeantime, there will not be a major catastrophe of incompatibility...\nEventually, some of the other formats might become less used, and will\nbe phased out (this is something that is already happening, for\nexample, with the transition from RSS 0.91 to RSS 2.0). And because,\ncurrently, RSS is being almost exclusively used for updates and\nregenerated constantly at each endpoint, there will be little if any\nswitchover cost, again, as an example of this I put forward the\ntransition from RSS 0.91 to RSS 2.0 that happened last year.\n\n\n\n

Obviously, it's on us, the developer community, to add necho support\nwithout disruption, and it's not a problem. After all, we are already\ndoing it today, and moving most (hopefully all) tools into necho will\neventually reduce work for developers in the future, allowing us to,\nfinally, concentrate on improving the tools rather than on how to let\nthem connect to each other.

\n
\n\n\n
Source:d2r: why (not)echo is important -- part 2\n\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n

When I read\nDave's post\nthat developers were trying to \"rip up the pavement, break\neverything and start over\", I wondered what he was talking about.\n(Strangely, I can't find the original posting on Dave's blog. Maybe\nthe statement was revised\nin the face of a later endorsement of the\nproject?) The reason I was wondering is because nothing broke\non my desktop. Every RSS feed to which I subscribed was still feeding\nme RSS, and my home-brew aggregator continued crunching and delivering\nmy fix.

\n

In fact, my aggregator's RSS consumption is based on\nMark Pilgrim's Ultra-liberal RSS parser.\nAnd, it looks like Mark's been one\nof the developers involved in the (not)Echo project. Mark didn't\nbreak anything for me, and couldn't if he wanted to. On the contrary,\nhe continues to offer his code, and even updated it not more than a\nmonth ago to address link-vs-guid concerns in a useful way. Hell, even\nthough Mark demonstrated his break with RSS tinkering rather concretely\nby implementing a very literal interpretation of the spec, I can still\ndownload\nhis working RSS parser code.

\n

I'm a user and a developer all at once: I produce RSS, I consume RSS,\nI develop with RSS, and yet I'm watching (not)Echo with great interest\nand welcome it when it's ready. I fully expect that, in my tinkering,\nit'll take me less than a lazy evening's work to put together a\ntemplate to publish a (not)Echo feed from my blog, and to add\n(not)Echo support to my aggregator. Hell, I might even get another\nparser from Mr. Pilgrim to drop into my project. But, as long as\nothers are still producing and expecting RSS, I'll still accept and\noffer RSS. No breakage here. In fact, if I get off my lazy butt,\nI'll unfunkify\nmy own feed and upgrade it to RSS 2.0 while I'm at it.\nThis isn't really heavyweight stuff here.

\n

Then, I read things like\nJon Udell's Conversation with Mr. Safe\nand other worries that the whole technology of web content syndication\nand management will be avoided by big money, or even more horribly,\nco-opted by big money in the confusion. Has the BBC or the New York Times\nexpressed any change of heart with their decision to offer their content\nin a syndication format? Has the basic tech stopped working? There are no\npieces of sky on my balcony, though I fully admit that I might be too\nnaive to see them.

\n

See, to me, RSS ain't the thing. Content syndication and aggregation\nare the thing, and that's going strong. Are the people with big money\ninterested in this geeky thing called RSS, or are they interested in\nsyndication and aggregation? You know, getting their content out\nthere and read? Do they know that this (not)Echo effort hasn't\nactually made RSS-supporting software stop working, nor will it ever?\nJust because a bunch of bloggers and tinkerers got together and decided\nto start making an alternate format and API doesn't mean that the\nexisting, mature technology suddenly goes sproing.

\n

In fact, unless or until this upstart (not)Echo project builds\nsomething amazing in terms of in-spec capabilities and vendor support,\nthe currently working RSS-based tech is a safe bet. And, in fact, I'd\nbe willing to bet that RSS will still be a force to consider in years\nto come, even if (not)Echo introduces some irresistable pull.\nCompanies like Blogger and ?SixApart would reveal themselves to be run\nby morons if they screwed users by dumping RSS overnight. (And that's\nignoring the fact that someone would come along and whip something\nup to fix their idiocy somehow.)

\n

And, I'm sure Microsoft or some well-heeled vendor could try stepping\nin with a format of their own and try to steamroll it through with\ntheir own blogging tools and aggregation services, but you know,\nthey're not omnipotent. The Internet didn't go away when MSN was\nintroduced, and the web full of RSS feeds won't go away even if they\nintroduce MSNBlogs or some such. It'd take a gigantic fight, lots of\nvery shiny bits, or many bribes.

\n

I mean, that's what it takes to get my cats to do anything.

\n\n\n\n

shortname=syndications_formats

\n

Archived Comments

\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n", "body": "
\r\nTools will start to support necho as well as RSS. The formats will\r\ncoexist, just as RSS 0.91 and RDF and RSS 2.0 coexist\r\ntoday. Furthermore, this coexistence will be transparent, just like\r\ntoday. Over time, necho will, hopefully, become the standard. In the\r\nmeantime, there will not be a major catastrophe of incompatibility...\r\nEventually, some of the other formats might become less used, and will\r\nbe phased out (this is something that is already happening, for\r\nexample, with the transition from RSS 0.91 to RSS 2.0). And because,\r\ncurrently, RSS is being almost exclusively used for updates and\r\nregenerated constantly at each endpoint, there will be little if any\r\nswitchover cost, again, as an example of this I put forward the\r\ntransition from RSS 0.91 to RSS 2.0 that happened last year.\r\n

\r\nObviously, it's on us, the developer community, to add necho support\r\nwithout disruption, and it's not a problem. After all, we are already\r\ndoing it today, and moving most (hopefully all) tools into necho will\r\neventually reduce work for developers in the future, allowing us to,\r\nfinally, concentrate on improving the tools rather than on how to let\r\nthem connect to each other.\r\n
\r\n
Source:d2r: why (not)echo is important -- part 2
\r\n

\r\nWhen I read\r\nDave's post\r\nthat developers were trying to \"rip up the pavement, break\r\neverything and start over\", I wondered what he was talking about.\r\n(Strangely, I can't find the original posting on Dave's blog. Maybe\r\nthe statement was revised\r\nin the face of a later endorsement of the\r\nproject?) The reason I was wondering is because nothing broke\r\non my desktop. Every RSS feed to which I subscribed was still feeding\r\nme RSS, and my home-brew aggregator continued crunching and delivering\r\nmy fix.\r\n

\r\nIn fact, my aggregator's RSS consumption is based on\r\nMark Pilgrim's Ultra-liberal RSS parser.\r\nAnd, it looks like Mark's been one\r\nof the developers involved in the (not)Echo project. Mark didn't\r\nbreak anything for me, and couldn't if he wanted to. On the contrary,\r\nhe continues to offer his code, and even updated it not more than a\r\nmonth ago to address link-vs-guid concerns in a useful way. Hell, even\r\nthough Mark demonstrated his break with RSS tinkering rather concretely\r\nby implementing a very literal interpretation of the spec, I can still\r\ndownload\r\nhis working RSS parser code.\r\n

\r\nI'm a user and a developer all at once: I produce RSS, I consume RSS,\r\nI develop with RSS, and yet I'm watching (not)Echo with great interest\r\nand welcome it when it's ready. I fully expect that, in my tinkering,\r\nit'll take me less than a lazy evening's work to put together a\r\ntemplate to publish a (not)Echo feed from my blog, and to add\r\n(not)Echo support to my aggregator. Hell, I might even get another\r\nparser from Mr. Pilgrim to drop into my project. But, as long as\r\nothers are still producing and expecting RSS, I'll still accept and\r\noffer RSS. No breakage here. In fact, if I get off my lazy butt,\r\nI'll unfunkify\r\nmy own feed and upgrade it to RSS 2.0 while I'm at it.\r\nThis isn't really heavyweight stuff here.\r\n

\r\nThen, I read things like\r\nJon Udell's Conversation with Mr. Safe\r\nand other worries that the whole technology of web content syndication\r\nand management will be avoided by big money, or even more horribly,\r\nco-opted by big money in the confusion. Has the BBC or the New York Times\r\nexpressed any change of heart with their decision to offer their content\r\nin a syndication format? Has the basic tech stopped working? There are no\r\npieces of sky on my balcony, though I fully admit that I might be too\r\nnaive to see them.\r\n

\r\nSee, to me, RSS ain't the thing. Content syndication and aggregation\r\nare the thing, and that's going strong. Are the people with big money\r\ninterested in this geeky thing called RSS, or are they interested in\r\nsyndication and aggregation? You know, getting their content out\r\nthere and read? Do they know that this (not)Echo effort hasn't\r\nactually made RSS-supporting software stop working, nor will it ever?\r\nJust because a bunch of bloggers and tinkerers got together and decided\r\nto start making an alternate format and API doesn't mean that the\r\nexisting, mature technology suddenly goes sproing.\r\n

\r\nIn fact, unless or until this upstart (not)Echo project builds\r\nsomething amazing in terms of in-spec capabilities and vendor support,\r\nthe currently working RSS-based tech is a safe bet. And, in fact, I'd\r\nbe willing to bet that RSS will still be a force to consider in years\r\nto come, even if (not)Echo introduces some irresistable pull.\r\nCompanies like Blogger and ?SixApart would reveal themselves to be run\r\nby morons if they screwed users by dumping RSS overnight. (And that's\r\nignoring the fact that someone would come along and whip something\r\nup to fix their idiocy somehow.)\r\n

\r\nAnd, I'm sure Microsoft or some well-heeled vendor could try stepping\r\nin with a format of their own and try to steamroll it through with\r\ntheir own blogging tools and aggregation services, but you know,\r\nthey're not omnipotent. The Internet didn't go away when MSN was\r\nintroduced, and the web full of RSS feeds won't go away even if they\r\nintroduce MSNBlogs or some such. It'd take a gigantic fight, lots of\r\nvery shiny bits, or many bribes.\r\n

\r\nI mean, that's what it takes to get my cats to do anything.\r\n\r\nshortname=syndications_formats\r\n\r\n
\r\n

Archived Comments

\r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n
\r\n ", "parentPath": "./content/posts/archives/2003", "path": "2003/07/07/syndications-formats", "summary": "Tools will start to support necho as well as RSS. The formats will\ncoexist, just as RSS 0.91 and RDF and RSS 2.0 coexist\ntoday. Furthermore, this coexistence will be transparent, just like\ntoday. Over time, necho will, hopefully, become the standard. In the\nmeantime, there will not be a major catastrophe of incompatibility...\nEventually, some of the other formats might become less used, and will\nbe phased out (this is something that is already happening, for\nexample, with the transition from RSS 0.91 to RSS 2.0). And because,\ncurrently, RSS is being almost exclusively used for updates and\nregenerated constantly at each endpoint, there will be little if any\nswitchover cost, again, as an example of this I put forward the\ntransition from RSS 0.91 to RSS 2.0 that happened last year.\n\n\n\nObviously, it's on us, the developer community, to add necho support\nwithout disruption, and it's not a problem. After all, we are already\ndoing it today, and moving most (hopefully all) tools into necho will\neventually reduce work for developers in the future, allowing us to,\nfinally, concentrate on improving the tools rather than on how to let\nthem connect to each other.\n\n\n\nSource:d2r: why (not)echo is important -- part 2\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nWhen I read\nDave's post\nthat developers were trying to \"rip up the pavement, break\neverything and start over\", I wondered what he was talking about.\n(Strangely, I can't find the original posting on Dave's blog. Maybe\nthe statement was revised\nin the face of a later endorsement of the\nproject?) The reason I was wondering is because nothing broke\non my desktop. Every RSS feed to which I subscribed was still feeding\nme RSS, and my home-brew aggregator continued crunching and delivering\nmy fix.\nIn fact, my aggregator's RSS consumption is based on\nMark Pilgrim's Ultra-liberal RSS parser.\nAnd, it looks like Mark's been one\nof the developers involved in the (not)Echo project. Mark didn't\nbreak anything for me, and couldn't if he wanted to. On the contrary,\nhe continues to offer his code, and even updated it not more than a\nmonth ago to address link-vs-guid concerns in a useful way. Hell, even\nthough Mark demonstrated his break with RSS tinkering rather concretely\nby implementing a very literal interpretation of the spec, I can still\ndownload\nhis working RSS parser code.\nI'm a user and a developer all at once: I produce RSS, I consume RSS,\nI develop with RSS, and yet I'm watching (not)Echo with great interest\nand welcome it when it's ready. I fully expect that, in my tinkering,\nit'll take me less than a lazy evening's work to put together a\ntemplate to publish a (not)Echo feed from my blog, and to add\n(not)Echo support to my aggregator. Hell, I might even get another\nparser from Mr. Pilgrim to drop into my project. But, as long as\nothers are still producing and expecting RSS, I'll still accept and\noffer RSS. No breakage here. In fact, if I get off my lazy butt,\nI'll unfunkify\nmy own feed and upgrade it to RSS 2.0 while I'm at it.\nThis isn't really heavyweight stuff here.\nThen, I read things like\nJon Udell's Conversation with Mr. Safe\nand other worries that the whole technology of web content syndication\nand management will be avoided by big money, or even more horribly,\nco-opted by big money in the confusion. Has the BBC or the New York Times\nexpressed any change of heart with their decision to offer their content\nin a syndication format? Has the basic tech stopped working? There are no\npieces of sky on my balcony, though I fully admit that I might be too\nnaive to see them.\nSee, to me, RSS ain't the thing. Content syndication and aggregation\nare the thing, and that's going strong. Are the people with big money\ninterested in this geeky thing called RSS, or are they interested in\nsyndication and aggregation? You know, getting their content out\nthere and read? Do they know that this (not)Echo effort hasn't\nactually made RSS-supporting software stop working, nor will it ever?\nJust because a bunch of bloggers and tinkerers got together and decided\nto start making an alternate format and API doesn't mean that the\nexisting, mature technology suddenly goes sproing.\nIn fact, unless or until this upstart (not)Echo project builds\nsomething amazing in terms of in-spec capabilities and vendor support,\nthe currently working RSS-based tech is a safe bet. And, in fact, I'd\nbe willing to bet that RSS will still be a force to consider in years\nto come, even if (not)Echo introduces some irresistable pull.\nCompanies like Blogger and ?SixApart would reveal themselves to be run\nby morons if they screwed users by dumping RSS overnight. (And that's\nignoring the fact that someone would come along and whip something\nup to fix their idiocy somehow.)\nAnd, I'm sure Microsoft or some well-heeled vendor could try stepping\nin with a format of their own and try to steamroll it through with\ntheir own blogging tools and aggregation services, but you know,\nthey're not omnipotent. The Internet didn't go away when MSN was\nintroduced, and the web full of RSS feeds won't go away even if they\nintroduce MSNBlogs or some such. It'd take a gigantic fight, lots of\nvery shiny bits, or many bribes.\nI mean, that's what it takes to get my cats to do anything.", "needsBuild": true, "prevPostPath": "2003/07/07/washed-up-huh", "prevPostTitle": "Washed Up, Huh?", "nextPostPath": "2003/07/07/backup-question", "nextPostTitle": "Backups with my eyes closed?" }