The Power Of The People

by M. David Peterson

In a follow-up comment to my follow-up post to "If It's Not Broken, Don't Fix It!", aptly titled "It *IS* Broken, So It *NEEDS* Fixing", Kent Sharkey writes:

It does beg the question, though (and I'm just trying to be a straight man here), "Why aren't Atom + existing extensions good enough?" (using or even Dublin Core as an example)

(Nice Catch Kent!)

So yeah... Kind of left off some important pieces as to why It *IS* broken. Of course, in a follow-up comment I pointed Kent at the original post and suggested blocking out a solid 10 minutes to read all of the follow-up comments, thinking incorrectly that this, in and of itself, was a justifiable thing to do.


What I needed to do was sum things up into a couple short bullet points, or at worst, two or three sentences. But instead of correcting my mistake by creating the above, I am insted going to:


Karl Dubost
2006-04-25 08:02:24
You said: "nothing to do with the fact that it has been ratified and standardized by IETF and recommended by the W3C"

Ah? Where has it been recommended by the W3C?

M. David Peterson
2006-04-25 08:27:39
Am I incorrect in this? Obviously you would no *A LOT* better than I would, but I was (before now) certain that this was the case, especially given its W3C-based namespace (

Does the W3C allow the use of its domain for namespaces without first going through some sort of approval process? This isn't the only reason I am of this impression as it seems to me that between one of the top-level commitee members (the IETF Atom Commitee) I have seen mentioned in one of their blog entries something to this effect. I will need to do some searching to find out for sure though.

Thanks for letting me know that I may be incorrect in my assumptions. If, in fact, I have read more into this than is actually the case, I will be sure to correct my error in a new blog entry.