is RSS 2.0 still RSS 2.0 if we add our own unique tags to it?

Discussion in 'XML' started by Jake Barnes, Nov 13, 2005.

  1. Jake Barnes

    Jake Barnes Guest

    I've been trying to read up on RDF and RSS. I've been trying to get my
    mind around not just the technical issues but some of the cultural and
    political issues that surround these formats. I've been given the task
    of adding some unique tags to our companies feed, and I'm wondering
    what path to follow. In theory, we are extending our RSS feed with new
    tags. I worry what technical and political landmines I might trip by
    doing this wrong.

    As regards RSS, I read this essay by Mark Pilgrim, and it gives me a
    lot to think about:

    In his essay, he says "I would like to publicly apologize for my
    previous misstatements. There are not 7 different and incompatible
    versions of RSS; there are 9."

    After reading that essay, I'm left with the impression that it is a bad
    thing to extend RSS 2.0 with new tags.

    Yet, I've the impression that Dave Winer expects others to extend RSS

    I'm working for a small software company that was working on software
    that was suppose
    to allow people to go online and create RSS feeds that they could use
    to offer podcasts on their websites. However, my company now feels that
    the market for podcasting software
    is saturated and so we must do something unique. One idea that has been
    by my co-workers involves extending RSS 2.0 with new tags. Another idea
    has been
    to use the cloud tag in RSS 2.0 to register the company's website as a
    central directory of
    all information about what people are podcasting. Another idea is to
    give up on RSS and simply use a unique blend of RDF to offer rich
    metadata regarding what people podcast. A friend suggested that we
    design a set of tags that would offer a lot of friend of a friend
    networking that would also have all the info one expects to see in RSS

    I'm left wondering, if we add a bunch of tags to RSS 2.0, should we
    still call in RSS 2.0, or should we call it something else?

    Whatever thoughts or information you can furnish, I'll be grateful to

    Lawrence Krubner
    Jake Barnes, Nov 13, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  2. Andy Dingley

    Andy Dingley Guest

    On 12 Nov 2005 16:14:13 -0800, "Jake Barnes" <>

    >After reading that essay, I'm left with the impression that it is a bad
    >thing to extend RSS 2.0 with new tags.

    It's a bad idea to _use_ RSS 2.0

    >Another idea is to
    >give up on RSS and simply use a unique blend of RDF to offer rich
    >metadata regarding what people podcast.

    Do this within RSS 1.0 This is the strength of RSS 1.0 - because it's
    based on RDF, you can easily pull stuff like this.

    OTOH, if I were a commercial developer looking at new RSS tools, I'd be
    looking at Atom 1.0 It's early days as yet, but Atome is (IMHO) where
    the future is.
    Andy Dingley, Nov 14, 2005
    1. Advertisements

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. A. Brinkmann
    A. Brinkmann
    Apr 16, 2004
  2. Replies:
    Steve C. Orr [MCSD, MVP, CSM, ASP Insider]
    Mar 27, 2007
  3. Replies:
    Mar 28, 2007
  4. raju
    Mark Rae [MVP]
    Dec 28, 2007
  5. Jonathan Groll
    Kouhei Sutou
    Jun 27, 2009

Share This Page