Attention.xml and OPML, why not?

re: Attention.xml and OPML, why not?

james governor — Tue, 08 Nov 2005 14:14:42 GMT

why does nobody ever spell gillmor right? i even wrote a blog on the subject
http://www.redmonk.com/jgovernor/archives/000915.html

if you want to support his ideas, it might help to get his name right. i dont mean that rudely, its a question of feedback and trackability and so on.

re: Attention.xml and OPML, why not?

alexbarn — Tue, 08 Nov 2005 17:51:01 GMT

Thanks James, corrected - v.valid point re tracking....

re: Attention.xml and OPML, why not?

Danny — Wed, 09 Nov 2005 15:17:19 GMT

IMHO, having a usable data model for the attention domain is the starting point, a common format on top of that is desirable. I personally believe the actual format used is secondary, as long as it's good enough for the job and people can agree to use it. I've been critical of the specifics of Attention.xml myself in the past, but it's good enough and it is already out there. I think it would be more productive to support the current XHTML-based representation than inventing another based on OPML.

Ok, on your non-tech points:

1. (X)HTML is already integrated into many RSS-aware 'products' (client-side applications and services) today.

2. XHTML will be used significantly more as time passes

3. XHTML is simple -this allows many more than just hardcore developers to understand and play

4. XHTML is flexible enough to take on this role

5. Attention.xml seems to be going nowhere, fast
- true, but it isn't clear how simply using a different format will improve matters technically or socially (especially given the points above). How will forking into a different format push things forward?

Some technical points:

1. OPML doesn't play nicely with other XML formats - the lack of a namespace limits reuse for a start.

2. Whatever format is used, a clear, unambiguous specification is a prerequisite for interoperability. There isn't one for Attention in OPML, and that format's history to date doesn't offer much prospect of there being one in the forseeable future.

re: Attention.xml and OPML, why not?

Danny — Wed, 09 Nov 2005 15:31:01 GMT

PS. "The Free Open Protocol World Wide Linkup Tool" - er, yep, that's HTML+HTTP.

re: Attention.xml and OPML, why not?

charlie bess — Wed, 09 Nov 2005 19:38:29 GMT

I wrote a blog entry the other day about how I'd use this kind of capability, without knowing about your entry, but someone pointed yours out.

http://www.eds.com/sites/cs/blogs/eds_next_big_thing_blog/archive/2005/11/09/8210.aspx

Alex Barnett blog : My Attention writings

Alex Barnett blog : My Attention writings — Sun, 25 Jun 2006 04:32:27 GMT

PingBack from http://blogs.msdn.com/alexbarn/articles/510483.aspx