This post originated from an RSS feed registered with Agile Buzz
by James Robertson.
Original Post: Re: Questions for Dave
Feed Title: Cincom Smalltalk Blog - Smalltalk with Rants
Feed URL: http://www.cincomsmalltalk.com/rssBlog/rssBlogView.xml
Feed Description: James Robertson comments on Cincom Smalltalk, the Smalltalk development community, and IT trends and issues in general.
"The format would differ from RSS 2.0 as little as possible" and "It would be backward compatible with RSS 2.0, so that any 2.0 feed could become an RSS/Atom feed by changing (fill in the blank, as little change as possible)."
What's the difference between this and saying that Atom should be abandoned? Currently, Atom documents are very different from RSS 2.0 documents, so adhering to these two points would basically mean leaving Atom completely, or do I have it wrong?
The question isn't wrong, but it does touch on something interesting at the technical level, which is this: there's little difference between Atom and RSS at the document level. The two formats convey exactly the same information, in exactly the same way. Atom simply changes the tag names, and adds in three (instead of one) date fields. Heck, in BottomFeeder I use the same exact domain objects for both kinds of feeds. That's the fun part of all of this - at the end of the day, Atom is effectively just another form of RSS
Previous Topic
