Subject: Re: "Role of RSS in Science Publishing"

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 09:54:11 EST

In a message dated 12/15/2004 8:51:43 PM GMT Standard Time, 
[email-masked] writes:

> I wasn't aware that RSS2 and Atom aren't extensible!
> 
> +-----------( Figure 2 )-------------------------+
> |                         |
> |        (Simple: Plain XML)         |
> |                         |
> |       +---(0.91)--(0.92)--(2.0)--(Atom)   |
> |       |                   |
> |       |                   |
> |  --(0.9)---+---(1.0)               |
> |                         |
> |        (Extensible: RDF/XML)        |
> |                         |
> +------------------------------------------------+
> 
> Sigh...

One thing that struck me from the diagram that Robert redrew is the implicit 
assertion that Atom 0.3/1.0 is a descendant of RSS 2.0.

The term "lineage" is used in the figure caption in the paper that Danny 
pointed us to. That seems to me to go beyond the reality.

Also classifying Atom as "RSS" (as the paper does) doesn't seem to me to aid 
clarity.

Andrew Watt