Posts tagged as: namespace

Kosso has an interesting idea about extending RSS and OPML

Kosso sends his regrets for having to work last night, and not being able to join the OPML podcast, but he also drops an interesting hint on what he has been working on:

One way of implementing this would be to use a namespace to add an audio timestamp to RSS, and then create an RSS file with one item for each timestamped portion of a .mp3 file. A playlist linking to multiple annotated RSS files could then be constructed in OPML. Apple already has an iTunes namespace for RSS 2.0, but this doesn't allow for timestamping sections of the .mp3. Something tells me that namespaces for RSS and OPML are going to explode this year. Things may get messier than some people would like.

RSS Advisory board finds a new way to extend RSS

You have to give Rogers Cadenhead credit. After enduring several weeks of blistering attacks by Dave Winer over attempts to create a new version of RSS 2.0, he is once again trying to improve RSS. This time, Rogers and his fellow members of the RSS Advisory Board are proposing a new RSS namespace called XRSS. He evidently came to the same decision as I did with OPML. If the only way Dave will allow RSS or OPML to be extended is by the use of a new namespace, then that is what has to be done.

The funny thing is that I just tried to write an explanation of the difference between using a namespace and changing the core format, and I can't find a way to do it that shows why one is better than another. In the end, an application that uses these extensions still has to know what to do with them. The only benefit seems to be that a namespace gives the application permission to ignore the new tag. I can hear the crickets chirping right now. This is not a subject that will hold an audience. I'm going to start working with namespaces in OPML, and perhaps then I'll find a way of explaning them that won't make normal humans run screaming out of the room.

Creating an OPML 2.0 namespace

Matt Terenzio, one of the OPML Camp attendees, has suggested that we hold a session on OPML namespaces. This is permitted in the OPML 2.0 spec: "An OPML file may contain elements and attributes not described on this page, only if those elements are defined in a namespace, as specified by the W3C." We should definitely do this, but maybe we could take this one step further and create an OPML Camp namespace that we can all experiment with. If an OPML Adv... oops ... Stan... oops ... if a publicly recognized group discussing OPML is formed, this namespace can be given over to them to hold and maintain.