 | | Re: RSS vs. Atom (was: Attention All RSS Geeks) —Kelly McKiernan
|
| | | (...) Sorry about that, got distracted! Mostly BrickFest, some other things. Back on it again, and your email from 1 August was very helpful in setting the direction for LENNI. (...) I think both Atom and RSS as a base would allow us to do this. (...) (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish, FTX)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: RSS vs. Atom (was: Attention All RSS Geeks) —Dan Boger
|
| | | | | (...) Adding tags to the spec isn't "expensive" - and since clients won't be required to implement support for new tags, unless they want to, I say, let's think of anything we can want, and then decide if it's worth adding to the spec or not. :) (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: RSS vs. Atom (was: Attention All RSS Geeks) —Kelly McKiernan
|
| | | | | | (...) Yeah, good point - I had my software developer hat on (lazy boy Kelly) and not the Visionary On The Mount hat ("all that and a side of fries!") you need for setting up something like this... BTW, I'd like to make sure appropriate people are (...) (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: RSS vs. Atom (was: Attention All RSS Geeks) —Kelly McKiernan
|
| | | | | (...) Oh! Oh! How about Content Type (not CDATA): News Blog MOC Announcement (or is this redundant with news or MOC?) Calendar Item ... what else? Probably need a better label than "Content Type" since that terminology is already used technically (...) (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: RSS vs. Atom (was: Attention All RSS Geeks) —Dan Boger
|
| | | | | | | (...) * Administrative (both LENNI and content providers) * Market-ish (as Larry mentioned) * Poll? (...) How about "Category"? (...) Yah, should be able to allow that. An item can be of multiple themes... Can it be of multiple categories? (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: RSS vs. Atom (was: Attention All RSS Geeks) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) For Sale (so that people can filter it out!) or some more generic marketish tag (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | Re: RSS vs. Atom (was: Attention All RSS Geeks) —René Hoffmeister
|
| | | | (...) You really shouldn't have to apologize. I didn't meant it this way. I just thought the topic is of no interest, without any subjective assessment. But so much the better that you carry on with LENNI, I'm really glad about it. Unfortunalety, (...) (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: RSS vs. Atom (was: Attention All RSS Geeks) —Kelly McKiernan
|
| | | | (...) Ha! You do better than many native-English speakers I deal with daily. (...) That's a good question. I do think most feeds will end up being served from a centralized server, but that's not an absolute necessity. RSS links can be distributed, (...) (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: RSS vs. Atom (was: Attention All RSS Geeks) —Dan Boger
|
| | | | (...) Why have a centralized server? I'd expect there be a list of feeds someplace, and maybe mirroring of feeds... But it would make a lot of sense to have each feed hosted off the service that generates it. Unless LENNI wants to support remote (...) (20 years ago, 25-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: RSS vs. Atom (was: Attention All RSS Geeks) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | (...) I saw a centralised server as an aggregator, not the primary source of the original content. I think there's a desire to be able to aggregate feeds from many places and present them blended together. Once aggregated, some specific filtering (...) (20 years ago, 25-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: RSS vs. Atom (was: Attention All RSS Geeks) —Kelly McKiernan
|
| | | | | | (...) That's pretty much what I'm thinking too... provide tools for anybody to publish LENNI-enhanced feeds from their own sources, and provide other tools for readers, either web-based or desktop/compiled. And as a side benefit, I also see the (...) (20 years ago, 26-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: RSS vs. Atom (was: Attention All RSS Geeks) —René Hoffmeister
|
| | | | (...) Hm. I guess there is a misunderstanding somewhere (and I think it's caused by language barriers, sorry, I simply don't know how to translate individual technical descriptions). But I'll try one more time. It would be ridiculous if we couldn't (...) (20 years ago, 26-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: RSS vs. Atom (was: Attention All RSS Geeks) —Kelly McKiernan
|
| | | | (...) [SNIP] (...) I agree, one centralized area would be an excellent resource, one which LENNI could accomplish easily, I believe. That's a big part of why I think something like this should be created. Let me expand my assumptions on the project (...) (20 years ago, 29-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish)
|
| | | | |
