4 ms·
I agree with the spirit of, “better to popularise independent syndication than fight over formats” except: > the technical implementation is secondary Until u
by modernerd 9y ago
I agree with the spirit of, “better to popularise independent syndication than fight over formats” except:
> the technical implementation is secondary
Until users get a bad experience that can't be solved easily because the spec was set in stone over a decade ago.
Or until people want to extend and improve the spec to create new standards that prevent fractured and disparate extensions to it.
Technical implementation is often secondary, but RSS already failed to achieve mainstream status once. That is not all down to the RSS spec, but recognising that RSS is a candidate for obsoletion and building on something active and progressive might give the idea of indie syndication a healthier second/third/fourth chance.
A non-dead spec that's actively tended, marketed, and used for building great new platforms may garner more interest and prevent the “been there — tried that — it wasn't for me” that RSS seems to induce in non-techies.
- pmlnr 9y agoRSS is good enough for what it was made for and most of the parser libraries and software parse both Atom and RSS (all 0.9, 1.0 and 2.0). Atom vs RSS caused enough trouble already ( https://indieweb.org/RSS_Atom_wars https://indieweb.org/RSS_Atom_wars ) and the solution is definitely not JSONFeed, just to break all previous feed reader implementation. Let us accept that any parser lib should be able to deal with RSS and Atom, and move on.