Re: The Tragedy of RSS

In a message dated 10/4/2002 12:17:42 AM US Mountain Standard Time, 
leo@mmk.ru writes:
> Suppose "the struggle" connected with insufficient deep grounds used !
> Look at the "To keep abreast of the 21st century" paper
> http://ototsky.mgn.ru/it/21abreast.htm
> 
> 

Hi Leonid,

There is a lot of interesting points in the article but I don't know if we
are ready for additional complexity (via deeper grounds) yet.  I think
every complex feature must be tied to a direct benefit.  The chief complaint
from RSS developers that I see in the newsgroups is that RDF adds
complexity without any extra features or benefits.  They don't see the
benefit -- and I don't either with respect to RSS.  For me, I see 
ontologies and inference as demonstrating a clear value added.  Until we
have those quibbling over the syntax of simple syndication seems like
a waste of time.   Why?  Because when the time comes that we have
robust ontologies and robust inference mechanisms -- enough changes
will have occurred to the syntax to make existing RDF moot.  

Since I am stirring the pot -- let's throw in another slap in the face -- 
WSDL.
It is evident that it is a description of resources ... but no RDF in sight.
Why fight with one hand tied behind your back?  Why push a bad design.

At what point do you go back to the drawing board and say --- many
people think this is broke.  Let's take an axe to it.

 - Mike
----------------------------------------------------
Michael C. Daconta
Director, Web & Technology Services
www.mcbrad.com