Posted by
ryuzaki0
on from the the-unseen-battle? dept.
heeeraldo writes "Is there another format war on the horizon? This wiki compares the two, and finds that even though RSS has far greater deployment (and mindshare), Atom 1.0 solves a lot of the problems associated with it."
Atom's More Than A Syndication Format
by
arthurs_sidekick
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Atom is both a syndication format and an API for creation, updating, and deletion of content. It's already in widespread use by Blogger.
What's been (all but) finalized is the syndication format (and rules for extending it). This allows the working group to firm up the details of the publishing API, which, for my money, is the real payoff with Atom.
A pretty good overview of the history of RSS and the motivations behind Atom is here.
-- "Oh, I hope he doesn't give us halyatchkies," said Heinrich.
Re:Firefox support?
by
superskippy
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Already done- Firefox supports lots of different sorts of RSS and Atom already.
Re:Firefox support?
by
arthurs_sidekick
·
· Score: 3, Informative
You're soaking in it.
(Firefox has supported Atom since at least the first full release of the RSS support; the Sage plugin also supports Atom).
Kids, Atom's not new. It's been developed by lots of smart folks.
-- "Oh, I hope he doesn't give us halyatchkies," said Heinrich.
So all feeds supported in Longhorn will be: RSS 0.9x RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0 ATOM 0.3 ATOM 1.0
It's called namespaces...
by
jeroenb
·
· Score: 4, Informative
and it doesn't make their RSS-files incompatible with "standard" readers.
Re:I would consider...
by
superskippy
·
· Score: 5, Informative
RSS and Atom are standardised ways of having a live list of stories appear from say a newssite (like this one) in various programs. Firefox calls these live bookmarks. I came here using firefox by clicking on my toolbar, seeing all of the new stories, and deciding I was interested in this one. You can also use it for desktop "news ticker" applets.
The trouble with RSS (short answer) is that there are at least three different versions of it invented by different people. As far as I know there was an RSS 0.7, then someone else invented a new protocol and called it RSS 1, then the original person invented RSS and called it version 2, but some people argue 2 is worse than 1:(. All of these standard's owners have been accused of not taking on board comments from the wider community.
Atom is another protocol for doing the same thing. Technical issues aside, it gets my vote because they didn't decide to call it RSS 3. Or RSS 10.
Re:No question
by
Isofarro
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Not exactly true. Microsoft have confirmed that their Longhorn RSS plans does include handling Atom. They have thrown their weight behind RSS as in syndication, not RSS as the file format.
Parent Makes No Sense
by
samael
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Atom isn't forked off of RSS, it's another implementation of the concept of syndicated content. RSS itself isn't a concept, it's a specification for a data transfer format.
The parent post really doesn't make any sense at all.
Re:Where's the comparison?
by
Isofarro
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Atom cleanly specifies how to incorporate plain text, html and XHTML content in an entry. Covering how text and html needs to be escaped, etc.
RSS2.0 had a problem last year where Reuters suffered a public embarrassment adopting the format. They followed the specification correctly, and it resulted in silent data loss - their stock identifiers were in angled brackets and got treated as an HTML tag by news aggregators.
It wasn't rocket science, but this simple thing turned out to be impossible to do with RSS2.0 - it was tried many times. After the funky feed debacle, the community realised that a separate format independent of RSS2.0 was the only way to fix the underlying problem.
The proponents of RSS2.0 tried to fix the silent data loss, and ended up breaking backwards compatibility with RSS0.92 - something they weren't prepared to do before Atom.
Re:I would consider...
by
Linus+Torvaalds
·
· Score: 3, Informative
The trouble with RSS (short answer) is that there are at least three different versions of it invented by different people.
As far as I know there was an RSS 0.7, then someone else invented a new protocol and called it RSS 1, then the original person invented RSS and called it version 2
No. The short version is that somebody at Netscape invented 0.9something based on RDF. The public release (another 0.9something) was rushed for my.netscape.com and wasn't based on RDF. Then Netscape abandoned the format, and Dave Winer republished the 0.9something specification. He made a couple more basic changes, all 0.9somethings. Then somebody else published a 1.0 that was again based on RDF. Dave threw a hissy fit, accusing them of stealing "his" RSS, and renamed 0.9something as 2.0.
It's more or less true that 1.0 was released as a fait accompli, however unintentional. However the real thorn stopping people from working together is, and always has been, Dave Winer. The guy's an asshole.
Re:Once again
by
jez9999
·
· Score: 3, Informative
IE supports enough PNG functionality to be able to do anything you could do with JPEG, and more. It just can't do proper transparency, which JPEGs don't support either.
Re:I would consider...
by
WWWWolf
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Well, these are are XML syndication formats. In other words, they move headlines and article summaries from server to user in machine-parseable format.
There's RSS, which is the reigning de facto standard, but it also is regrettably very, very liberally specified, and even less frequently heeded. Everyone's extending it to their own heart's content more or less competently. There are lots of different variations. Not easy to implement, not easy to learn.
Atom is an attempt to make a real standard-like standard out of RSS's best features and some of its own. It tastes more commitee-like, is probably initially less funny to implement on the server end (if you're lazy), but it is very nicely standardised and as a result it's far easier to write a parser for it, too, so client support is coming fast. And, it's more than just a syndication format: There's API for publishing and the atom format can, as such, also be used as a standardised weblog backup/storage format.
Re:Once again
by
InvalidError
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I think the fact that JPEG (1985) has been around for many more years than PNG (1995) and the fact that Unisys was collecting LZW (used by PNG) licenses from 1995 to 1999 also have something to do about that.
In any case, the majority of sites I visit still use GIFs (1987) for generic elements, like the rounded end on separators and story icons here.
AFAIK, PNG was never aimed at replacing JPEG... its main aim was to provide a better, Compuserve-free GIF alternative.
As someone who's implemented them both
by
savala
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Atom wins hands-down. Things are actually well specified.
I can just walk through the atom specification, implementing it as I go, and not have any questions about what is required, what type of content can be present in any one element, I don't have to look up five even less well-specified different modules just to get the basics of the feed together (and thus also don't have to worry about namespaces), what elements and attributes mean (actually, I spent a minor five minutes agonizing over what I should put in the term atribute of the category element, given that the label attribute contains the human readable version, before realizing that I was completely free in this, as the "scheme" os up to myself, and deciding to mirror how categories are named in the url on the website (which I found to be consistent with various other already existing atom 1.0 feeds that I checked)), or... well, basically any kind of question that you need to think about as you implement a new and previously unknown specification.
RSS on the other hand (any of the 9 incompatible versions)... *shudders* Those specifications don't tell me anything. I copy/paste from other feeds and heavily use the feedvalidator, but... *shakes his head*
Once all feedreaders have been updated to support Atom 1.0 completely, I'll go and pull the plug on the remaining RSS feeds, and good riddance too!
This comparison (on the Atom site, natch) misses one very important point, which is the rapid rise of podcasting and videoblogging. All of these "rich media" syndications rely on the <enclosure> tag, which is exclusive to RSS 2.0.
It's funny how this writeup doesn't even mention enclosures, despite the hundreds of thousands of people downloading content this way. The only place it comes up is in the chart at the end, which makes some side reference to <link rel="enclosure"> in Atom, which is a far kludgier (and nonstandard) way to do things.
-- ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine
Re:Semantics
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1, Informative
>So while RSS is stuck with regular HTML (escaped markup, whoa!) and images in its contents, Atom can already embed other XML namespaces like XHTML, SVG, MathML, FOAF, Dublin Core...
FOAF and DC can be used in RSS 1.0 (which is RDF) without any problems. It's even quite natural to use RDF vocabularies in an RDF syndication format. I agree on the content encoding matter. Guessing what format RSS 0.9x/2.0 tags use (plain text, escaped HTML, CDATA,...) sucks big time (see http://virtuelvis.com/archives/2004/03/11-ways-to- valid-rss)
It was actually GIF that used the LZW algorithm - PNG is favored by webmasters exactly because it's unencumbered by patent issues.
-- we discovered a new way to think.
Re:Once again
by
damiangerous
·
· Score: 2, Informative
the fact that Unisys was collecting LZW (used by PNG) licenses from 1995 to 1999 also have something to do about that.
No, LZW was a major motivator for creating PNG, not a mark against it. PNG is LZW free. Also it isn't limited to 256 colors like GIF.
AFAIK, PNG was never aimed at replacing JPEG... its main aim was to provide a better, Compuserve-free GIF alternative.
You're right about that though, if not for the right reasons. PNG wasn't really designed to have anything to do with JPEG, they mostly serve different purposes. With the expiration of the LZW patent it's not really a "GIF replacement" anymore, because there's no longer any reason not to use GIF if it suits your needs. PNG has become simply another format with its own benefits (and a couple small drawbacks).
Slashdot Mirror
Atom is both a syndication format and an API for creation, updating, and deletion of content. It's already in widespread use by Blogger.
What's been (all but) finalized is the syndication format (and rules for extending it). This allows the working group to firm up the details of the publishing API, which, for my money, is the real payoff with Atom.
A pretty good overview of the history of RSS and the motivations behind Atom is here.
"Oh, I hope he doesn't give us halyatchkies," said Heinrich.
Already done- Firefox supports lots of different sorts of RSS and Atom already.
You're soaking in it. (Firefox has supported Atom since at least the first full release of the RSS support; the Sage plugin also supports Atom). Kids, Atom's not new. It's been developed by lots of smart folks.
"Oh, I hope he doesn't give us halyatchkies," said Heinrich.
Unmolested version - get it while it lasts
http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:http%3A%2F%2F www.intertwingly.net%2Fwiki%2Fpie%2FRss20AndAtom10 ComparedGoogle Cache, now that it's been defaced.
Microsoft said they will also support ATOM in Longhorn. http://www.winfuture.de/news,21461.html - I can't find an english news.
So all feeds supported in Longhorn will be:
RSS 0.9x
RSS 1.0
RSS 2.0
ATOM 0.3
ATOM 1.0
and it doesn't make their RSS-files incompatible with "standard" readers.
RSS and Atom are standardised ways of having a live list of stories appear from say a newssite (like this one) in various programs. Firefox calls these live bookmarks. I came here using firefox by clicking on my toolbar, seeing all of the new stories, and deciding I was interested in this one. You can also use it for desktop "news ticker" applets.
The trouble with RSS (short answer) is that there are at least three different versions of it invented by different people. As far as I know there was an RSS 0.7, then someone else invented a new protocol and called it RSS 1, then the original person invented RSS and called it version 2, but some people argue 2 is worse than 1 :(. All of these standard's owners have been accused of not taking on board comments from the wider community.
Atom is another protocol for doing the same thing. Technical issues aside, it gets my vote because they didn't decide to call it RSS 3. Or RSS 10.
Not exactly true. Microsoft have confirmed that their Longhorn RSS plans does include handling Atom. They have thrown their weight behind RSS as in syndication, not RSS as the file format.
Atom isn't forked off of RSS, it's another implementation of the concept of syndicated content. RSS itself isn't a concept, it's a specification for a data transfer format.
The parent post really doesn't make any sense at all.
My Journal
Atom cleanly specifies how to incorporate plain text, html and XHTML content in an entry. Covering how text and html needs to be escaped, etc.
RSS2.0 had a problem last year where Reuters suffered a public embarrassment adopting the format. They followed the specification correctly, and it resulted in silent data loss - their stock identifiers were in angled brackets and got treated as an HTML tag by news aggregators.
It wasn't rocket science, but this simple thing turned out to be impossible to do with RSS2.0 - it was tried many times. After the funky feed debacle, the community realised that a separate format independent of RSS2.0 was the only way to fix the underlying problem.
The proponents of RSS2.0 tried to fix the silent data loss, and ended up breaking backwards compatibility with RSS0.92 - something they weren't prepared to do before Atom.
The trouble with RSS (short answer) is that there are at least three different versions of it invented by different people.
Three? Try nine.
As far as I know there was an RSS 0.7, then someone else invented a new protocol and called it RSS 1, then the original person invented RSS and called it version 2
No. The short version is that somebody at Netscape invented 0.9something based on RDF. The public release (another 0.9something) was rushed for my.netscape.com and wasn't based on RDF. Then Netscape abandoned the format, and Dave Winer republished the 0.9something specification. He made a couple more basic changes, all 0.9somethings. Then somebody else published a 1.0 that was again based on RDF. Dave threw a hissy fit, accusing them of stealing "his" RSS, and renamed 0.9something as 2.0.
It's more or less true that 1.0 was released as a fait accompli, however unintentional. However the real thorn stopping people from working together is, and always has been, Dave Winer. The guy's an asshole.
IE supports enough PNG functionality to be able to do anything you could do with JPEG, and more. It just can't do proper transparency, which JPEGs don't support either.
== Jez ==
Do you miss Firefox? Try Pale Moon.
Well, these are are XML syndication formats. In other words, they move headlines and article summaries from server to user in machine-parseable format.
There's RSS, which is the reigning de facto standard, but it also is regrettably very, very liberally specified, and even less frequently heeded. Everyone's extending it to their own heart's content more or less competently. There are lots of different variations. Not easy to implement, not easy to learn.
Atom is an attempt to make a real standard-like standard out of RSS's best features and some of its own. It tastes more commitee-like, is probably initially less funny to implement on the server end (if you're lazy), but it is very nicely standardised and as a result it's far easier to write a parser for it, too, so client support is coming fast. And, it's more than just a syndication format: There's API for publishing and the atom format can, as such, also be used as a standardised weblog backup/storage format.
You may find the Atom web page quite informative.
I think the fact that JPEG (1985) has been around for many more years than PNG (1995) and the fact that Unisys was collecting LZW (used by PNG) licenses from 1995 to 1999 also have something to do about that.
In any case, the majority of sites I visit still use GIFs (1987) for generic elements, like the rounded end on separators and story icons here.
AFAIK, PNG was never aimed at replacing JPEG... its main aim was to provide a better, Compuserve-free GIF alternative.
Atom wins hands-down. Things are actually well specified .
I can just walk through the atom specification, implementing it as I go, and not have any questions about what is required, what type of content can be present in any one element, I don't have to look up five even less well-specified different modules just to get the basics of the feed together (and thus also don't have to worry about namespaces), what elements and attributes mean (actually, I spent a minor five minutes agonizing over what I should put in the term atribute of the category element, given that the label attribute contains the human readable version, before realizing that I was completely free in this, as the "scheme" os up to myself, and deciding to mirror how categories are named in the url on the website (which I found to be consistent with various other already existing atom 1.0 feeds that I checked)), or... well, basically any kind of question that you need to think about as you implement a new and previously unknown specification.
RSS on the other hand (any of the 9 incompatible versions)... *shudders* Those specifications don't tell me anything. I copy/paste from other feeds and heavily use the feedvalidator, but... *shakes his head*
Once all feedreaders have been updated to support Atom 1.0 completely, I'll go and pull the plug on the remaining RSS feeds, and good riddance too!
It's funny how this writeup doesn't even mention enclosures, despite the hundreds of thousands of people downloading content this way. The only place it comes up is in the chart at the end, which makes some side reference to <link rel="enclosure"> in Atom, which is a far kludgier (and nonstandard) way to do things.
ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine
>So while RSS is stuck with regular HTML (escaped markup, whoa!) and images in its contents, Atom can already embed other XML namespaces like XHTML, SVG, MathML, FOAF, Dublin Core...
...) sucks big time- valid-rss)
FOAF and DC can be used in RSS 1.0 (which is RDF) without any problems. It's even quite natural to use RDF vocabularies in an RDF syndication format. I agree on the content encoding matter.
Guessing what format RSS 0.9x/2.0 tags use (plain text, escaped HTML, CDATA,
(see
http://virtuelvis.com/archives/2004/03/11-ways-to
It was actually GIF that used the LZW algorithm - PNG is favored by webmasters exactly because it's unencumbered by patent issues.
we discovered a new way to think.
No, LZW was a major motivator for creating PNG, not a mark against it. PNG is LZW free. Also it isn't limited to 256 colors like GIF.
AFAIK, PNG was never aimed at replacing JPEG... its main aim was to provide a better, Compuserve-free GIF alternative.
You're right about that though, if not for the right reasons. PNG wasn't really designed to have anything to do with JPEG, they mostly serve different purposes. With the expiration of the LZW patent it's not really a "GIF replacement" anymore, because there's no longer any reason not to use GIF if it suits your needs. PNG has become simply another format with its own benefits (and a couple small drawbacks).