phil ringnalda dot com: "The only other option that will work for everyone seems to be creating Yet Another RSS Format, and doing it right by our current view of right. That would probably be sort of fun, cleaning up things like exactly what is and isn't allowed in description, and I think RSS 4.0 is still available (or maybe 5.0), but I doubt that very many people really have the stomach for it. And those that do probably only do because they only know the technical side of RSS, not the social side."

I came across this today doing some research on namespaces and extensions to RSS2 and thought it was worthy bringing up. It was originally written in 2003, and apparently, not quite on the mark.

Apparently some did have the stomach to try and come up with Yet-Another-RSS.

Problem is, I still haven't seen any evidence that anyone cares. A few of us talked about this at the podcast meetup on Tuesday. For some reason, some people still think that the ATOM vs. RSS discussion matters.

Users are interested in two things - getting stuff done and managing content (taking it in, putting it out - it all falls into the bucket of "managing content" - no real difference...) Thing is, they aren't interested in syndication formats - in the least. They're interested in what syndication formats allow - getting stuff done and managing content.

In a few years, we'll talk about RSS and ATOM in the same way that we talk about UHF and VHF.