Recommended MIME type for RSS 2.0

[Bill Kearney]

Before I do, if anyone can think of any reasons why these two formats
should not be married together in holy MIME type, speak now or forever
hold your peace.

Seeing as how it's already a de facto standard, I see no reason not to move
forward on the idea.

-Bill Kearney
Syndic8.com

[Sam Ruby]

Post by Bill Kearney

Before I do, if anyone can think of any reasons why these two formats
should not be married together in holy MIME type, speak now or forever
hold your peace.

Seeing as how it's already a de facto standard, I see no reason not to move
forward on the idea.

+1

- Sam Ruby

[Sean Lyndersay]

+1

-----Original Message-----
From: rss-***@yahoogroups.com [mailto:rss-***@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Bill Kearney
Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 10:00 AM
To: rss-***@yahoogroups.com; rss-***@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [rss-public] Re: Recommended MIME type for RSS 2.0

Before I do, if anyone can think of any reasons why these two formats
should not be married together in holy MIME type, speak now or forever
hold your peace.

Seeing as how it's already a de facto standard, I see no reason not to move forward on the idea.

-Bill Kearney
Syndic8.com




Yahoo! Groups Links

[Bill Kearney]

And I don't think combining forces
with RSS-DEV is going to help much either.
No harm in applying, and I don't want to be pesimistic, but I think you

need

to be realistic about your chances of success.

You might actually want to ask before making those assumptions.

I definitely think we should apply and see what happens (assuming the
two groups support the attempt).

I'd be willing to support the use of something independent, like a purl URL.
A discussion could be held to setup the necessary redirect from it.

Officially application/rss+xml wouldn't identify RSS 2.0
documents, but documents conforming to this new profile (which could cover
both RSS 2.0 and RSS 1.0). In reality people will continue to use it for

any

old RSS feed, but that doesn't matter. At least it would be registered.

Indeed, the win lies in getting the i's dotted and the t's crossed, if only
for folks that find that sort of thing relevant.

-Bill Kearney
Syndic8.com

[Bill Kearney]

And I don't think combining forces
with RSS-DEV is going to help much either.
No harm in applying, and I don't want to be pesimistic, but I think you

need

to be realistic about your chances of success.

You might actually want to ask before making those assumptions.

I definitely think we should apply and see what happens (assuming the
two groups support the attempt).

I'd be willing to support the use of something independent, like a purl URL.
A discussion could be held to setup the necessary redirect from it.

Officially application/rss+xml wouldn't identify RSS 2.0
documents, but documents conforming to this new profile (which could cover
both RSS 2.0 and RSS 1.0). In reality people will continue to use it for

any

old RSS feed, but that doesn't matter. At least it would be registered.

Indeed, the win lies in getting the i's dotted and the t's crossed, if only
for folks that find that sort of thing relevant.

-Bill Kearney
Syndic8.com




Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rss-dev/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
rss-dev-unsubscribe-***@public.gmane.org

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/