Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

MS Reveals Info On New RSS Extensions

Posted by Zonk on from the many-hands-make-light-work dept.

dizzy_p writes "Microsoft released yesterday more information on their earlier announced extensions to the RSS format(s). The specifications can be found on MSDN. The question is, will the mainstream developer adopt these specifications, or will they only live in the Microsoft "Blogosphere" (To quote MSDN). The specifications in question are named Microsoft Simple Sharing Extensions Specification and Microsoft Simple List Extensions Specification"

146 comments

  1. Ah yes... by endtwist · · Score: 2, Insightful

    More proprietary extensions from Microsoft. Now the question is, how useful are they really?

    1. Re:Ah yes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      It is sad that all the good things still have to be made by corporation and the community is still unable to create something useful (like a working RSS-spec) on its own. But I guess the matter is too complicated for hobbyists to solve the problems.

    2. Re:Ah yes... by wizkid · · Score: 1

      Very Useful.

      Remember -- Embrace and Extend. Incorporate into your own browser, and nobody elses so everyone breaks accept IE.

      Hopefully, it will fail this time, but.....

      --
      I take no responsibility for what I say. Even though I'm never wrong :)
    3. Re:Ah yes... by Prospero's+Grue · · Score: 4, Insightful
      More proprietary extensions from Microsoft.

      It's the Microsoft way...

      Embrace. Extend. Extinguish.

      --
      The opinion above is fiction. Any similarity to real opinions, including facts and logic, is purely coincidental.
    4. Re:Ah yes... by peterpi · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Time will tell how useful they are. Hopefully they will be, maybe they won't be. Bravo for the effort by MS though.

      http://msdn.microsoft.com/xml/rss/sse/ reads pretty much like an IETF RFC. MS have done some thinking and given their ideas to the public internet. Good for them.

    5. Re:Ah yes... by kidtwist · · Score: 0, Troll

      You have difficulty understanding the "standards" thing, don't you?

    6. Re:Ah yes... by Secrity · · Score: 0, Troll

      I would imagine that Microsoft considers them to be very useful in continuing their practice of embracing, extending, and extinguishing industry standards.

    7. Re:Ah yes... by CaymanIslandCarpedie · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Not so "proprietary". Here is the license it uses: Creative Commons, Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5.

      Also here is a blog post by its creator if you want to read more about and what it is meant to accomplish without digging through the spec.

      Not bad!

      --
      "reality has a well-known liberal bias" - Steven Colbert
    8. Re:Ah yes... by Breaker_1 · · Score: 0

      I'd say the real questions is why? Why not spend the time and resources improving existing products?

    9. Re:Ah yes... by SilentChris · · Score: 0, Redundant

      How on earth did you get an +1 Insightful moderation for that one?

      "Microsoft makes operating systems. They run software." Quick, someone throw me a +1 Informative.

    10. Re:Ah yes... by deck · · Score: 1

      It is hard to trust MS after all that they have done. The anology of a wolf in sheep's clothing or the parable of the boy who cried wolf, come to mind when putting trust and Microsoft into the same thought happens. To paraphrase Ronald Reagan, "Trust with verification".

      Deck
      -----------------
      "Half a deck is better than none at all"

    11. Re:Ah yes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Still better than the Apple-way:

      Gay. Homo. OMG-purrdy. Gay. Gay. GAAA-HAY!

    12. Re:Ah yes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      "everyone breaks accept IE"?

      I think it's time you get a new sig...

    13. Re:Ah yes... by grcumb · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "http://msdn.microsoft.com/xml/rss/sse/ reads pretty much like an IETF RFC."

      Okay, it looks like an RFC, but why isn't it an RFC?

      Besides the fact that RSS doesn't appear to have been submitted to the IETF either, of course. Both the MS extension and original RSS spec were released under Creative Commons licenses. So what's the point of releasing a spec without going through the standards process? It depends on the motives of the issuer, doesn't it?

      I personally am strongly opposed to this kind of unilateralism. I'm not a big fan of Dave Winer's approach to things, and I'm even less of a fan of MS'. Having worked on the web almost from the day it was born, I can speak from experience, and MS has been a divisive force from the moment they cottoned on to this Internet thing, almost single-handedly creating the security nightmare we have today by plying half-educated cargo-cult 'developers' with convenience and ease of use that turned out to be easy for anyone to exploit.

      So please, when we look at this issue, let's not forget two things:

      • Specs exist for a reason - peer review, consultation and openness. MS has ensured none of these in this instance.
      • MS has created these pseudo-standards in the past, in effect, dressing itself up in black robes and saying, 'I belong on the Supreme Court too, 'cause I got the robes!'

      The (false?) naivete that the parent espouses does nothing to change my suspicion that this new 'standard' from MS is any different from what came before. MS are relying on just this kind of cursory investigation ('He must be a judge; he's wearing a robe!') to insinuate these extensions into the mainstream.

      I would trust them a lot more if they took the time to actually cooperate with the community, and to follow the well-established processes that exist. They've buckled down and done so in the past, so why can't they do it this time?

      --
      Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
    14. Re:Ah yes... by jacksonj04 · · Score: 1

      "The good thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from."

      - Andrew Tanenbaum

      --
      How many people can read hex if only you and dead people can read hex?
    15. Re:Ah yes... by rspress · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I agree. Microsoft took a great thing, a standards based internet, and screwed it up so bad it will be years before the damage can be fixed, if at all.

      The worst offender is Active X. Great if you are running Windows and Internet Explorer but bad for the rest of the world. Of course when Microsoft proposed this they were going to give it to the world and provide the tools for all platforms but that never happened. Now we have websites and even embedded devices that will only work on their platform. Of course that was the plan. The only way to own the internet is to make sure it only works with your OS. This has spread to their servers and content creation tools. When now have sites that only work when running windows and internet explorer.

      When sun made a deal with Microsoft for Java it was to be a two way street. Any of the code developed for Java was to be sent to sun and the rest of the world. Microsoft accepted. Until it came time for their code to be opened sent back to sun where it would be open for all.

      With Microsoft you have to wonder what their intentions are. Most often it is to entrench their OS at all costs, despite the gloss their PR department tells the rest of the world. As for not going through the "official" standards channels there is probably a very good reason for that and Microsoft knows that.

  2. Plenty Useful.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    to MS marketing.

    We'll start seeing ,These RSS feeds work only with MS RSS Reader. or some such shit. Which will piss me off almost as much as This website is best viewed with Internet Explorer.

    So take note, I hate all of you developers that insist on using MS extensions for any web development. Burn in Hell!

    Fuckers!

    1. Re:Plenty Useful.... by VernonNemitz · · Score: 1

      Embrace, Extend, and Exterminate

      Remember?

  3. Adding to things? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In all honesty I'd be more impressed if I saw them adhering to standards with even half the zeal that they want to "enhance" them.

  4. What kind of attitude is that? by Renegade+Lisp · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm not very familiar with this topic, and of course Microsoft-bashing is easy in this forum, but still: What kind of attitude is that? Making extensions to a specification and publishing them for everybody else to use? So that's the way standards are defined in the Microsoft universe? I thought "making a standard" meant getting together with everybody else (or at least some approximation of that) and work things out together?

    1. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by Prospero's+Grue · · Score: 1
      I thought "making a standard" meant getting together with everybody else (or at least some approximation of that) and work things out together?

      That's not the way Microsoft works. That's not the way Cisco works. That's not the way any dominant player in a space would be inclined to work (this principle seems to hold from technology all the way to geopolitics).

      --
      The opinion above is fiction. Any similarity to real opinions, including facts and logic, is purely coincidental.
    2. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by rmsousa · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah, because standards that are developed from the beginning by a commitee are SOOOOO better compared to de facto standards. Now let me resume coding in ADA.

    3. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If RedHat/Sun/IBM-on-some-days-of-the-week-but-not-on -others had done the same thing, most of the crowd here would be jerking each other off over how wonderful it is that they published the standard.

    4. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by fbg111 · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's called the "embrace, extend, extinguish" attitude, Microsoft's standard operating procedure since day 1. No less annoying nowadays, but certainly not surprising. I doubt it will work with RSS, though, since RSS is already in wide use outside the "MS blogosphere", and popular tools like Google Desktop Search and most FOSS RSS aggregators won't incorporate MS's extensions.

      --
      Flying is easy, just throw yourself at the ground and miss. -Douglas Adams
    5. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by Renegade+Lisp · · Score: 1
      Yeah, because standards that are developed from the beginning by a commitee are SOOOOO better compared to de facto standards. Now let me resume coding in ADA.

      I don't think Ada is a good example for a poorly designed standard, but that's a different matter. I'm not saying standards should be designed-by-comittee up-front. If a company has the market power to set a de-facto standard, so be it. They should do so by offering products, maybe even whitepapers, but calling it a "standard" from the beginning is just the kind of attitude that will ultimately bring such a company down.

    6. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by fbg111 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Correction, I doubt these will succeed outside the MS blogosphere unless they are officially adapted by some standards body perceived as impartial.

      --
      Flying is easy, just throw yourself at the ground and miss. -Douglas Adams
    7. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by msormune · · Score: 1

      They are not standards, they are specifications. Any one can cook up a specification and publish it.

    8. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by rmsousa · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Maybe that's why they call them "extensions", not "standards"...

    9. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by Secrity · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      It is just a common MS practice that MS uses to retain it's monopoly position. For more information concerning Microsoft's practice of embracing, extending, and extinguishing industry standards, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_e xtinguish

    10. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by interiot · · Score: 1

      That doesn't mean that's the way they should work, or that there aren't examples of people out there who are showing that one doesn't necessarily need to be a bully to make money or be successful (eg. Google, open source companies...).

    11. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by amliebsch · · Score: 1
      They should do so by offering products, maybe even whitepapers, but calling it a "standard" from the beginning is just the kind of attitude that will ultimately bring such a company down.

      Maybe I missed something...but, what the hell are you talking about? RSS is already a standard, and Microsoft is publishing an "extension," as they clearly state.

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    12. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by PianoComp81 · · Score: 3, Informative

      No where do the links call this a "standard". RSS is a standard. These are add-ons (extensions) to the RSS standard. Now, I have no love for Microsoft, but I'd say we should give them a little credit for releasing their own extensions and licensing them under a Creative Commons License that essentially lets anyone impelment these extensions.

    13. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by Renegade+Lisp · · Score: 1
      Maybe that's why they call them "extensions", not "standards"...

      That's a valid point, and of course we are talking matters of style here. But if you look at the page, it says: This page offers the latest news and advice for RSS developers. and then it goes on to list several "Microsoft ... Extensions Specifications". No, they are not calling them "standards", yes, they are publishing them as such. At least that's how it appears to me. Granted, the original developer's documents sound a lot more down-to-earth technical, with a genuine interest in the matter, but given the way this is displayed by the corporate machine it's just not the kind of thing I would like to start using.

    14. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are different degrees of informing people about standards.

      For example, if I tought a young teenager (13-14 year-old) the pythagorean theorem, but not how to prove it, they could solve for sides of a right triangle (where two sides per triangle are given), without being able to understand how it works.

      In some cases when microsoft makes a standard, they only explain the interface, but not how it works. And, if there is a twist in ms' code, then no one else can implement the same "standard".

      Do some work with microsoft's products, then you will understand why microsoft bashing is more than justified. Even if they publish manual upon manual, I've worked with their shit too much to trust that there wouldn't be something important left out of the specs.

      Yes, I hate microsoft, but this hatred was only instilled after I found myself developing for windows (various versions).

    15. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by Shakes268 · · Score: 0

      What I find interesting is the fact that something like this (an attitude) actually has an article in Wikipedia. If articles such as this keep embedding themselves in something so useful I think the credibility of the resource will go down. While we're at it, lets write articles on Linux zealotry, unix outdatedness - all different viewpoints but more opinionated than factual. It can be spun either way - and if it can be spun and not objective I don't find it at all credible.

    16. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by Thundersnatch · · Score: 1

      Because we all know that some high school kid with enough time to submit his biased rantings to Wikipedia must be the ultimate authority. After all, it's on Wikipedia, and Wikipedia is decent and holy open-source knowledge portal that can't ever be wrong.

      Please stop using Wikipedia as a reference for anything but the most apolitical, factual topics... you'll seem a lot more credible.

    17. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by EvilMonkeySlayer · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hold on, you're saying that the moon landings actually happened?!
      Ridiculous!

    18. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by big+dumb+dog · · Score: 1

      Can't Microsoft simply support something without bastardizing it? I wonder what content will only be available through a Micro-Pod Cast?

      --
      "Seven years of college down the drain. Might as well join the f-ing Peace Corps." - John 'Bluto' Blutarsky
    19. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by Renegade+Lisp · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Maybe I missed something...but, what the hell are you talking about? RSS is already a standard, and Microsoft is publishing an "extension," as they clearly state.

      That is correct, they are calling it an "extension". But still, a "Microsoft Extension Specification" (which is the full term they use on the web site) sounds a whole lot different than a "Microsoft RFC" or a "Microsoft Extension Draft" or a "Microsoft Proposal". As I said in another post, this is very much a matter of style. But look to IBM for an example of a mega-player who's much more developed in its use of correct style in these matters.

    20. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by The+Bungi · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Well, Microsoft works with the W3C, ECMA et. al on a lot of standards. Is that what you were looking for? Or were you just not aware of that?

      And BTW, I'll take a standard developed by a governing body or company any day over a hacked-together "standard" like RSS or yENC or any of those others developed by people in their basement. While they are often "good enough", they tend to be underdocumented, hard to extend/adapt and are the source of wide-ranging pointless flamewars on teh interwebs. More often than not they are a worse mess than the one they're trying to "standardize". Ditto languages that evolve without formal specs.

    21. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by ergo98 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You were wrong. Just let it go and admit that you were wrong - Microsoft never called this a standard, and what they've done is entirely within their rights. It doesn't "look like a standard", it looks like a specification, and it's one that Microsoft has stated that they are going to follow. Good for them for at least publishing it for the world to see.

      IBM does things entirely the same way, by the way, as does Google, Sun, Apple, and everyone else. That's if they're nice enough to making it unburdened and public.

      Microsoft has a lot of things that people can slam them about, but this isn't it. It just makes this group of people look idiotic when there's reaching to the depths like this ("Uh...it looks like a standard!").

    22. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "What kind of attitude is that? Making extensions to a specification and publishing them for everybody else to use?"

      AFAIK, that is the way things are done in RSS-land. There is no single, formal RSS standard. Instead, implementations evolve; from them, standards emerge.

    23. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by Renegade+Lisp · · Score: 1
      It doesn't "look like a standard", it looks like a specification, and it's one that Microsoft has stated that they are going to follow. Good for them for at least publishing it for the world to see.

      Beg to differ. "This page offers the latest news and advice for RSS developers," if you want it in a nutshell. Not just they are going to follow it; they suggest very strongly that this is how things are going to be in the future.

      I don't like this. That's what I said.

    24. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by amliebsch · · Score: 1
      I don't like this. That's what I said.

      Yes, well, you ALSO said:

      They should do so by offering products, maybe even whitepapers, but calling it a "standard" from the beginning is just the kind of attitude that will ultimately bring such a company down.
      This is what I was questioning.
      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    25. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by Tim+C · · Score: 1

      Woudl you prefer it if they made extensions to the specification and didn't tell anyone else about them?

      --
      It's official. Most of you are morons.
    26. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by Cenuij · · Score: 1

      yes quite.

      Extend, embrace, divide, conquer

      --
      my other sig is written in brainfuck ;)
    27. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by Renegade+Lisp · · Score: 1
      They should do so by offering products, maybe even whitepapers, but calling it a "standard" from the beginning is just the kind of attitude that will ultimately bring such a company down.

      This is what I was questioning.

      I grant you they are not calling it a "standard". That was an inference I made from their way of presenting it. I stand by my suspicion that they expect everybody to follow suit, without them feeling a need to cooperate with other partners within the industry.

    28. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by nich37ways · · Score: 1

      Are you coding up an IPSec implementation by any chance?

      --
      37 - what does it stand for really...
    29. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by ergo98 · · Score: 1

      Beg to differ. "This page offers the latest news and advice for RSS developers," if you want it in a nutshell. Not just they are going to follow it; they suggest very strongly that this is how things are going to be in the future

      It's the Microsoft Developer Network. The site is for Microsoft-centric developers. Microsoft can say "English for Developers" and present a specification, just as they can say "Naming Guidelines for Developers". It's just an extension for RSS, like there are dozens of other extensions for RSS (and those extensions are for...uh...RSS developers).

    30. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by Khuffie · · Score: 1

      RSS is an open specification. Nothing stops anyone from taking the specs and creating their own to suit their needs.

    31. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heh, I had to laugh out loud as I read this, as I am, at the moment, working on an IKE implementation actually :-). It's IKE -- with its needless use of the overly generalized ISAKMP protocol, and DOI values spread across multiple RFCs, when they should be in one single document -- that is the *real* mess.

      From what I've seen of the IKEv2 discussion lists, it won't end up being any simpler either. The committee seems just as big.. sigh.

    32. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "If RedHat/Sun/IBM-on-some-days-of-the-week-but-not-on -others had done the same thing, most of the crowd here would be jerking each other off over how wonderful it is that they published the standard."

      That is so not true. We reserve circle-jerk activities for major kernel releases and announcements from Linus Torvalds.

      At most this would only qualify for a baby-elephant-walk.

    33. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you read the RSS specs before posting? If yes, did you notice that the specs explicitely allows room for extensions, provided they are confined within a namespace? Now, does Microsoft extensions live in their own namespace? (hint: yes)

      http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss#extendingRss

      WHAT IS YOUR PROBLEM?

    34. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by ceejayoz · · Score: 1

      Well, that's how XMLHTTPRequest came about, so there's a place for such things I'd say. We'd be without Gmail and Google Maps and other such things if it weren't for Microsoft's unilateral non-standardness.

      That's not to say it's always (or even usually) a good thing - see ActiveX and the like - but to condemn it outright is silly.

    35. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So... Hitler talked about Jews being the source of all evil in Germany, but he did it at a Nazi party rally it was therefore fine for him to pollute his countrymen's minds with that filth?

      The forum you choose to speak at doesn't matter. The action & intent behind the action is what matters. Obviously we have the action in this case. There's obviously a difference of opinion on the intent behind the action.

      Therefore you should focus on discussing the intent. Don't get sidetracked on crap that doesn't matter, like WHERE someone said something, focus on WHAT they said. /BTW, Godwin simply stated that after enough time has passed a discussion will mention Hitler //No win/lose/pwn3d involved ///Sorry to spoil the urban legend

    36. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by fbg111 · · Score: 0, Troll

      What I find interesting is the fact that something like this (an attitude) actually has an article in Wikipedia.

      What I find interesting is the fact that somebody thinks my comments were worthy of a troll and flamebait mod. Neither my comments nor the Wikipedia article are either. I used "attitude" tongue-in-cheek, but EE is actually a business practice. If you read the Wikipedia article, you'll see that the author was careful to distinguish that "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish" is a claim made by Microsoft critics, rather than presenting it as an actual fact, and that furthermore, though the strategy is attributed by said critics to Microsoft, it has actually been used by dominant players in other industries prior to Microsoft. The Wikipedia article also supplies evidence of Microsoft's EEE tactics that anyone (Microsoft included) can attempt to refute if they so desire. Therefore, the Wikipedia article does not present this as fact, but rather as a claim made by critics, and it points out that as a business strategy EEE does indeed exist, and did before Microsoft ever purportedly used it, and it lists some of Microsoft's business tactics that could qualify as EEE. EEE is not just some random Wikipedia flame by a Linux fanboy, it's widely-known and discussed topic, with multiple pages of references even on Microsoft's own search engine. Finally, this Wikipedia entry is a far cry from baselessly insinuating that someone was involved in the Kennedy assassinations. I'm all for healthy skepticism when referencing Wiki articles, but this one has enough corroboration and recent historical significance that modding me (and the other poster who referenced it in this thread) troll and flamebait is overkill. I hope the metamods read and consider this when evaluating this thread.

      --
      Flying is easy, just throw yourself at the ground and miss. -Douglas Adams
    37. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by cyphercell · · Score: 2, Funny

      OMG Bill's moderating

      --
      Under the influence of Post-Cyberpunk Gonzo Journalism
    38. Re:What kind of attitude is that? by superflyguy · · Score: 1

      Except that microsoft then takes standards and either produces a sloppy implementation that they claim is IP or adds their own non-standard stuff, and their monopoly makes these into the defacto standard, which is not well documented and hard for anyone else to extend/adapt. So really it's a choice of whether you want to pay microsoft for an undocumented, sloppy implementation of a defacto standard that wasnat designed by a standards body.

  5. Java by superpulpsicle · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Can we learn from the lesson of Java that M$ is not the company that should be setting the standard for anything industry based. They always come out with their own modified version of XYZ and make everybody else play with them.

    1. Re:Java by John+Hurliman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And that's why Jscript and J# are the industry standards now? /endsarcasm

  6. Proprietary? by rmsousa · · Score: 5, Informative

    RTFA. Specially at the end. The text of the specification is under a Creative Commons license. Also, MS explicitly states that they have no intention of burdening implementations of the standard with patents.

    1. Re:Proprietary? by houghi · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Also, MS explicitly states that they have no intention of burdening implementations of the standard with patents.

      I have no intention of getting a hangover ever again in my life. There is a slight difference of not having the intention and not actually doing it.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    2. Re:Proprietary? by vsprintf · · Score: 1

      Why does the name Rambus jump to mind?

  7. Embrace and extend will not work as well.. by Ckwop · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Embrace and extend will not work as well as Microsoft think. Why? Because it's not the user that decides what feeds are available - it's the webmaster.

    Webmaster's want to maximise the number of people who can productively use their site. Given the choice of Microsoft's custom format or a format submitted to the IETF for an RFC number I know which one I'd rather use.

    Simon.

    1. Re:Embrace and extend will not work as well.. by ramrom · · Score: 1

      Ya but a visual stuio Extension that generates these feeds for websites automatically, will push it into every ASP.net website out there.

    2. Re:Embrace and extend will not work as well.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes, damn icrosoft for making things easy to use, and standards compliant. These "ehanced feeds" will still work in readers that dont use the new tags. This just adds extra stuff for readers that support them.

    3. Re:Embrace and extend will not work as well.. by DianeOfTheMoon · · Score: 1

      Umm....

      Since in 5 years, the majority of users who use RSS (like the web-browser, media player, etc.) will be using whatever Microsoft decides to plunk down on their desktop, all they have to do is require a few "proprietary" extensions and methods, and you'll see just how fast webmasters will conform to Microsoft's standards rather than the actual ones.

      I mean, we are talking about the same Microsoft, right?

      --
      Problems are like gifts, it's better to give than to receive
    4. Re:Embrace and extend will not work as well.. by caluml · · Score: 1

      But as any Sysadmin will tell you - it's the users that actually make your website worthwhile. If you don't implement the latest thing they all clamour for, they will seek out new sites that do.

      --
      Get your own free personal location tracker
    5. Re:Embrace and extend will not work as well.. by jrcamp · · Score: 1

      Most users don't even know what the hell an RSS feed is. Much less will they be calmoring for the Microsoft specific one. This is not an issue.

  8. Licensed Under Creative Commons by ThinkFr33ly · · Score: 5, Informative

    FTFA: Microsoft's copyrights in this specification are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License.

    This license is more simple, but the same in principle, to the GPL.

    1. Re:Licensed Under Creative Commons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Watch out there, the GPL never specifies or even intends to specify attribution. Licensing the text under Creative Commons ShareAlike encourages people to spread, discuss, and alter the text as necessary for whatever use of Microsoft's extension proposal. Ultimately it saves a lot of time and headache associated with their more standard license agreements. In this case though, you can be rest-assured that Microsoft will be the first and last company to post their own extension. Think of the Attribution part of the license in this case as a finger in their slice of cake.

    2. Re:Licensed Under Creative Commons by killjoe · · Score: 1

      Yes but what about the patents? Are they granting a blanket patent protection? Also what will they do to GPLed product that uses these extensions?

      --
      evil is as evil does
    3. Re:Licensed Under Creative Commons by MooUK · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Attribution, I believe, is enough to make it GPL-incompatible, or at least debateabley iffy.

      (I don't believe "debateabley" is a word. If someone has a better way to phrase it, please feel free to suggest it.)

    4. Re:Licensed Under Creative Commons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The word "simpler" is more simple than, but the same in principle as "more simple".

    5. Re:Licensed Under Creative Commons by stoborrobots · · Score: 1
      (debatably?)

      Also: It appears to me (IANAL, etc...) that the attribution requirement of the CC-BY-SA
      "4. c) ... You must keep intact all copyright notices for the Work ..."
      is not fundamentally different from the GPL's
      1. ... provided that you conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate copyright notice ...


      Actually, having just read through that in order to quote it, I've realised that no-where does it REQUIRE that the "appropriate copyright notice" include the original copyright owner's details... so you're probably right about the requirement being "iffy". But I don't believe that the CC-BY attribution clause is in the same line as the "obnoxious" BSD Advertising clause...
      --
      "Go to CNN [for a] spell-checked, fact-checked summary" -- CmdrTaco
    6. Re:Licensed Under Creative Commons by MooUK · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That license requires copyright to be intact for the originals on derivatives. The GPL doesn't - the deriver has to put a copyright notice on but it can be theirs.

      IANAL and so forth, nor am I a FSF authority. I just spout off whatever nonsense seems to make vague sense in my head!

  9. SSE Licensing information enigma by digitaldc · · Score: 3, Interesting

    As to software implementations, Microsoft is not aware of any patent claims it owns or controls that would be necessarily infringed by a software implementation that conforms to the specification's extensions. If Microsoft later becomes aware of any such necessary patent claims, Microsoft also agrees to offer a royalty-free patent license on reasonable and non-discriminatory terms and conditions to any such patent claims for the purpose of publishing and consuming the extensions set out in the specification. ( http://msdn.microsoft.com/xml/rss/sse/ )

    What?

    --
    He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
    1. Re:SSE Licensing information enigma by marcosdumay · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That means that if they happen to have a patent, they can submarine it. They can wait till everybody start using their extensions and then "disover" a patent and get fees (but constant fees) from people.

      --
      Rethinking email
    2. Re:SSE Licensing information enigma by daves · · Score: 1

      Didn't Microsoft previously use RAND licensing as a way to exclude all GPL code?

      --
      People who disagree with you are not automatically evil, greedy, or stupid.
    3. Re:SSE Licensing information enigma by Baricom · · Score: 1

      They can wait till everybody start using their extensions and then "disover" a patent and get fees (but constant fees) from people.

      What's the "royalty-free" part mean then?

    4. Re:SSE Licensing information enigma by Wesley+Felter · · Score: 1

      What part did you not understand? It's amazing to me that a single-word comment can get a score of 4.

    5. Re:SSE Licensing information enigma by mspohr · · Score: 1

      License can be royalty-free but also include terms to prohibit use in GPL software... such as no redistribution... they've already done this with some of their "free and open" licenses. (Kind of like Fox's "fair and balanced").

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    6. Re:SSE Licensing information enigma by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Royalty-free" means the part that the grandparent ignores/doesn't see because it conflicts with the biased worldview that he prefers. In this view, if the words "royalty-free" were even read, they were read to mean "free to charge a royalty". This is an embodiment of the famous catchphrase "I reject your reality and substitute my own."

      To the rest of us, this means that they cannot charge fees to developers coding under the RAND license, and the users that chose to use that code. Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.5 license. They cannot charge fees even if patents issue, due to promissory estoppel (i.e., the promise referenced in the great-grandparent post).

    7. Re:SSE Licensing information enigma by acb · · Score: 1

      Given the fact that they've licensed their own contributions to this code under a GPL-like Creative Commons license, them prohibiting the use of any patents involved with such licenses would be bizarre to say the least.

    8. Re:SSE Licensing information enigma by xenotrout · · Score: 3, Informative
      If Microsoft later becomes aware of any such necessary patent claims, Microsoft also agrees to offer a royalty-free patent license on reasonable and non-discriminatory terms and conditions to any such patent claims for the purpose of publishing and consuming the extensions set out in the specification.[1]

      Although royalty can mean "payment to the holder of a patent or copyright or resource for the right to use their property"[2], which would prevent Microsoft from charging for patent licenses applicable to their RSS Extensions, it more commonly means "a share of the profit or product reserved by the grantor"[3] or "compensation that is paid to the owner of an asset based on income earned by the asset's user"[4], which essentially limits Microsoft to a flat-fee license. Royalty free doesn't mean that they necissarily will charge for licenses but it seems to mean that they could.

      Although they say the terms will be "reasonable and non-discriminatory", I don't know what that means. I would hope it means that they don't discriminate against Free software, commercial software, competitors, people without money to pay for a license, etc. but it's very vague--perhaps there's a legal meaning or it's just there to sound nice.

      I think the patent trap idea is a bit out there--I don't think it's going to happen--but it doesn't seem that Microsoft is guaranteeing that it won't happen.

      Sources

      [1]http://msdn.microsoft.com/xml/rss/sse/
      Copyright © 2005 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

      [2] WordNet ® 2.0
      Copyright © 2003 Princeton University

      [3] The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
      Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
      Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

      [4] Wall Street Words: An A to Z Guide to Investment Terms for Today's Investor by David L. Scott.
      Copyright © 2003 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company.

    9. Re:SSE Licensing information enigma by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      There isn't a royality-free part on the patents, just reasonable and non-discrimatory.

      --
      Rethinking email
    10. Re:SSE Licensing information enigma by killjoe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      RAND licencing basically means open source projects are not able to implement this feature. I don't know of too many open source developers who can afford to pay licensing fees to MS. I suspect that there are patents out there and that MS will price them just above what the open source developers can afford. That way they can be non discriminating and still be a "standard".

      This is why ECMA is a joke. ECMA should not allow patented standards. It's an oxymoron.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    11. Re:SSE Licensing information enigma by killjoe · · Score: 1

      Why would be bizaare? They are a corporation and an unethical one that. They could change their minds tomorrow if they wanted to.

      This is the same company that submarined the SPF remember?

      --
      evil is as evil does
    12. Re:SSE Licensing information enigma by acb · · Score: 1

      If they submarined SSE and demanded the destruction of open-source implementations and/or severe licensing conditions, that would be devastating to anyone involved using this standard, and would all but obliterate the standard in question, not to mention any future proposals from Microsoft. The damage to Microsoft's influence on standards would greatly outweigh any damage inflicted on open-source software. It would be like nuking a few blocks of a city to get rid of a gang of bank robbers.

  10. Hey.... are you gonna eat that?... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Microsoft... sharing...

    ROFL!

  11. Re:Embrace, extend... by Chuqmystr · · Score: 1

    Indeed. Is it just history repeating or the kids didn't pay attention to the last couple of decades?

  12. Yeah, right... by Hakubi_Washu · · Score: 1

    That's why there aren't any IE-only sites out there anymore... Sorry to break this to you, but most "webmasters" will either slap something together that works in their browser (IE that is. "Why change something for the minority of users?" they ask) or that some "t00lz" creates for them (Hint: I've yet to see a CMS that produces, better yet, forces W3C valid output). It's a shame, yes, but I don't see why RSS should differ from HTML in that respect :-(

    1. Re:Yeah, right... by MooUK · · Score: 1

      There are standards-compliant CMS's out there. At least two that I know of. Trouble is, I can't remember WHICH.

    2. Re:Yeah, right... by ClamIAm · · Score: 1
      I've yet to see a CMS that produces ... W3C valid output

      And sometimes the answer is right under your nose.

  13. Presumptions... by design+by+michael · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Funny, I don't ever recall reading that Microsoft was responsible for the development and evolution of RSS. And now they want to set their own development standards? Seems to me that we had this same problem with HTML circa 1998/9.

    --
    401 - Attention span not found
    1. Re:Presumptions... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes but I guarantee that in a weeks time all the fanboys will be shouting how MS is soley responsible for RSS and the OSS world is just stealing their idea.

    2. Re:Presumptions... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, RSS is based on Microsoft's Channel Definition Format, which was in shipping product before Winer "invented" RSS.

  14. Re:yay by smittyoneeach · · Score: 1, Informative

    You really don't understand the 'embrace/extend/extinguish' cycle, do you?

    --
    Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
  15. Re:Typical embrace, extend..... by Tinned_Tuna · · Score: 1, Informative

    Yup, Embrace, Extend, sue anyone who disagrees. We love you M$, for all the bullshit and over priced bugware

  16. The great thing about standards ... by surfcow · · Score: 3, Funny

    The great thing about standards in the computer industry is that there are so many to choose from.

    1. Re:The great thing about standards ... by owlstead · · Score: 2

      NO. That should be:

      The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from.
              Andrew S. Tanenbaum

  17. Re:Embrace, extend... by RingDev · · Score: 1

    "Is it just history repeating or the kids didn't pay attention to the last couple of decades?"

    Yes because we've all seen what a failure Bill Gates and Microsoft have been over the last 20 years.

    -Rick

    --
    "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
  18. Answer: moderately by jfengel · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The Simple Sharing Extension sounds pretty useful. It defines extra fields to help make one feed dependent on another feed, which will be useful when you're creating RSS aggregators.

    The List Extension sounds less useful to me; it basically sets up fields to define ways to sort and group RSS feeds (like you can do with a SQL query). This one strikes me as less well thought-out and partially redundant with an RSS reader which could sort on any field. That's especially true for your basic blog-like RSS feed, where the set of fields in use is limited. It looks like this is a piece of a much larger generalized query mechanism using RDF.

    I'm not an RSS expert so I can't say how necessary these extensions are. But I'll remind everybody that most new standards come out as somebody initially saying, "Here, try this!" and the ones that like stick and are eventually blessed by a standards committee. HTML predates the W3C, and HTML got a good bit of bashing around trying to find the Right Thing in practice rather than having a standards committee guess what was right.

    So I'd recommend that people developing RSS readers consider adding these features and see if their users like them.

    1. Re:Answer: moderately by dzurn · · Score: 1
      Wait -- are you commenting on the substance of the RSS extensions from M$?

      Do you know where you are?

  19. Waiting for my head to explode by Black+Art · · Score: 4, Funny

    My brain is having problems with "Microsoft" and "sharing" being in the same sentence without "against" or "forbids" being involved.

    --
    "Trademarks are the heraldry of the new feudalism."
    1. Re:Waiting for my head to explode by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft forbids against sharing.

      Oh, you meant xor.

  20. R is for "really" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I have to wonder about the mentality of someone who looks at the RSS specification and thinks "What Really Simple Syndication needs is to be less simple".

  21. Microsoft this, and Microsoft that... by hackwrench · · Score: 1

    "Hey! Do the Bender! This move is called the Bender!"[1]

    This is a forum for freedom of expression, not fascist moves.

  22. GeoRSS anyone? by Lord+Satri · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I only quickly browsed MS's site, but I don't think they implemented something similar to georss.org.

    From slashgisrs: A team is working on Geographically Encoded Objects for RSS feeds. From the overview: "GeoRSS is simple proposal for RSS feeds to also be described by location or Geotagged. We standardize the way in which "where" is encoded with enough simplicity and descriptive power to satisfy most needs to describe the location of Web content. [...] it should serve as an easy-to-use geotagging language that is brief and simple with useful defaults but extensible and upwardly-compatible with more sophisticated formats like the OGC (Open Geospatial Consortium) GML (Geography Markup Language)".

    GeoRSS is really an interesting innovation from the actual concept of RSS.

    --
    Animoog.org
  23. Oh the Joy by oztiks · · Score: 1

    Okay so lets take a step back and have a look at MS's past wonderful contributions to computing standards .. Standard: HTML Contribution: enough said...

  24. Re:Oh the Joy [excuse the previous mess up] by oztiks · · Score: 1

    Okay so lets take a step back and have a look at MS's past wonderful contributions to computing standards ..

    Standard: HTML
    Contribution: <marquee>

    enough said...

  25. No by stavromueller · · Score: 0

    The question is, will the mainstream developer adopt these specifications No.

    --
    I kill harmless processes for sport
  26. Obviously.. by anethema · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ..This is the second phase in their usual plan of Embrace, Extend, Extinguish.

    --


    It's easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
    1. Re:Obviously.. by GeorgeMcBay · · Score: 0, Troll

      Actually all signs point to this being a case where Microsoft is hoping to fix limitations in an existing protocol while sharing the specification of the changes with everyone freely, very much unlike past "embrace and extend" efforts. The sort of knee-jerk "anything Microsoft does must be evil" reaction displayed in many posts on this subject make members of the OSS movement look like a bunch of mindless religious zealot drones and don't help anything.

    2. Re:Obviously.. by anethema · · Score: 1

      Here ill follow your troll moderation with maybe a flaimbait of my own.

      I dont edit or review source and couldnt care less about the open source movement. If linux was developed by some corperation to become the product it is today i would still use it.

      You just have to look at the fact that MS has done this with other technologies a million times (hyperbole before you jump on my back) and you will see why this knee jerk reaction is common.

      --


      It's easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
  27. uh, say what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's nothing standard about the lack of support for the beloved tag.

  28. What is a "mainstream" developer anyways? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How do you define "mainstream" as it applies to developers? Is a developer who does SQL code for a web app used by millions of people more or less mainstream than someone who writes a straight Win32 app for 5 customers?

    My guess is that developers who are writing RSS applications who see value in adding features based on these extensions will use it. Whether or not they are mainstream is a vague question that begs a pointless answer.

  29. Rss and VB 2005 by bokmann · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And today, this article appears on Developer.com: "RSS: So Simple with Wisual Basic 2005".

    http://www.developer.com/net/vb/article.php/356714 1

    "In no time, you can build a simple RSS viewer that takes a user-entered RSS feed URL and retrieves the title, description, and link for that channel."

    And so now we can expect a rapid proliferation of readers that don't work with every other RSS feed in the world; they will require the 'Microsoft Extensions' (I am assuming this of the VB implementation, either now or in the future). RSS feeds and readers alike will eventually have to implement it one way or the other.

    I don't know what the plan for World Domination here is, but it goes something like this:

    1) Wedge yourself in the middle where no one wants or needs you
    2) ???
    3) Profit!

    1. Re:Rss and VB 2005 by Old+Wolf · · Score: 2, Funny

      And today, this article appears on Developer.com: "RSS: So Simple with Wisual Basic 2005".

      Is that the result of outsourcing VB development to India?

    2. Re:Rss and VB 2005 by dogwelder99 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Did they remember to include security holes to let me embed viruses in an RSS feed? Email is such a drag nowadays.

  30. Why O Why by msuarezalvarez · · Score: 2, Interesting
    • Apart from the verbiage, could they not give a formal schema in XML Schema and/or RelaxNG or at the very least provide XML Schema Datatypes for things like "date" or "number"?
    • Could they not give a formal description of mapping from the general schema to a "simple" subset in which there are no defaults?
    • Do they have to use ad hoc paraphrases like "the name of the property (without any namespace)" instead of the standard XML Namespaces "local part" (or at least be precise in that they want the name of the element, without the prefix , as it could never have the namespace in it because namespaces are URIs)?
    • What does a <cf:group> with a label attribute but no element attribute group by and/or what does it allow one to filter by?
    • Do people at MS not provide references?
    • &c.
    "This specification is designed to be as simple as possible."

    Yup. Great. Sigh.

  31. go atom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and do yourself a favor: http://www.atomenabled.org/

  32. Yet another bastardized standard by queenb**ch · · Score: 1

    The Borg Collective always "proposes" some set of "alternate" standards which they then implement in their own products, attempting to make them the de facto standard by sheer force. This just sounds like more of the same from them.

    2 cents,

    Queen B

    --
    HDGary secures my bank :/
  33. EEE by Antiocheian · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Stage 1: Embrace

  34. Cisco? by horacerumpole · · Score: 2, Informative
    While there are probably many examples of Cisco inventing their own "standard", usually where an industry standard is yet to emerge, but they feature prominantly in many IETF working groups and other open standards commeetis.

    Granted that MS is also mentioned in some of such efforts, but still I think there is a place for Cisco to be offended from such a comparison as you used.

  35. Duh, guys... by SmurfButcher+Bob · · Score: 1

    RSS was one of the few WWW things that didn't easily allow for an exploit on IE. With these extensions, this much-needed functionality will finally be available to IE users, everywhere!

    Coming Soon to a Win32 box near you... ActiveRSS.NET(SP9)

    --

    help me i've cloned myself and can't remember which one I am

  36. Re:Embrace, extend... by abigor · · Score: 1

    He's referring to Microsoft's tendency to snuff out open standards by adding proprietary extensions to them, not whatever you seem to think he's talking about.

  37. Re:Embrace, extend... by guet · · Score: 1

    Yes because we've all seen what a failure Bill Gates and Microsoft have been over the last 20 years.


    Is a successful monopoly for Microsoft success for you as their customer/client?

  38. Paranoia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People are all screaming "embrace and extend" and such but they're missing the whole picture...

    Not compatible? I haven't looked at the actual specs yet, but it's based off RSS, so it's most likely very similar (perhaps even backwards compatible - just that the old clients won't get the extra infos; I'll check in a few minutes).

    Either ways, it doesn't matter. It's TOTALLY OPEN! GPL-like licensed, and it's just plain XML. Easy to parse and everything. It'll be easy to implement and use.

    And whoever is complaining about compatibility... How convenient you're forgetting there's 9 different versions of RSS, plus there's also ATOM feeds - several versions again, and other formats like klip, opml, myst and others (I've even seen things like data feeds as JSON or such).

    What's the problem with one newer, possibly better format, that's free/Free and easy to implement?

    I guess this is /. and somehow we just HAVE to bash MS no matter what. Obviously the RSS feed format was modified 8 times already without too making too much noise, but now, because it's MS basing a new format on it then it's Evil! They're not allowed to create some new extended/better format - even if it's Open and free/Free - for the benefit of anyone. They're innovating for once, so quit the whining and thank them for sharing it with everybody. I bet soon those all the whiners will be using it and liking it - and then conveniently "forget" it was a Microsoft innovation. That's the slashdot mentality...

  39. Dear MS by SuperFunFunFun · · Score: 1

    If you want your extensions to common protocols to succeed, I suggest you leave your corporations name out of the protocol name. And also leave out anything that resembles a copyright claim or license agreement. Web professionals are still dealing with the mess you made of HTML, Java and JavaScript.

  40. In Addition.... by fimion · · Score: 2, Funny

    ... Microsoft has added the ability to define scrollbar colors in RSS!

  41. This is why RSS will fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    RSS has been lucky so far. While the available tags has remained small, every company is defining their own namespace and pulling it in its own direction. Aside from that, I just don't see how "giving away snippets of information for free" can be a viable business option.

  42. Really Silly Sharing by richardtallent · · Score: 1

    I like the overall idea, and I commend Microsoft for releasing the idea under a CC license, but my problem with SSE is that it requires RSS as the underlying grammar. Shoe-horning arbitrary XML data into RSS just to take advantage of SSE is seriously short-sighted.

    SSE should be an aspect-oriented namespace that can be used to synchronize any XML data without regard to the underlying semantics, not one that requires bludgeoning XML data into a channel/item/headline/story format to take advantage of it.

    More:

    http://www.tallent.us/blog/CommentView.aspx?guid=c dc97850-c187-41e2-aaba-2875e457bcb1

  43. faux-standards again? by recharged95 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Actually, I'd buy it if other orgs accept it with the additional rule that Microsoft conducts a JCP-like paradigm in extending it further.

    Otherwise, this undos everything, i.e. takes the simple out of RSS

  44. Muddling the mix by Regnard · · Score: 1

    Ack! I can't stand MS doing their thing again (HTML, Java, etc.)

    Now some MS grunt will learn making RSS "the Microsoft way" and we will all be dealing with these "features." I just hope it doesn't become a standard.

    --
    Need a color? Try 100 random colors
    1. Re:Muddling the mix by man_of_mr_e · · Score: 1

      But yet you're mysteriously silent when Apple, Mozilla, and Opera CREATE AN ENTIRELY NEW NON-STANDARD TAG and add it to their browser (canvas).

      --
      If you need web hosting, you could do worse than here
  45. MS v. RSS by Dorsai65 · · Score: 1

    Hmmmm... MSSE Specification to be pronounced "Messy" Spec, and MSLES to pronounced MS Less. Works for me.

    --
    --- Asking inconvenient questions for over 30 years...
  46. Embrace and extend? What's the big deal? by wickedken · · Score: 1

    I don't really see a problem with MS embrace and extend.... usually it is an accepted development decision to use MS- specific technologies. What I consider to be more interesting though is the fact that embrace and extend is moreso a commercial action, to differentiate themselves from competitors with similar products. And sometimes it works so incredibly well:

    - the AJAX hype is all due to the MS XMLHTTP ActiveX object which IE5 (!) had, and now has only gotten to the point where there is so much hype because finally other browsers can support the same app design.

    - IFRAME was originally an MS extension to HTML, I believe.

    - HTML textareas MS originated.

    And of course there are lot's of failures (rather dead ends). SO this is just another way for MS to compete, and you'll know if they've won this when you're using their technology, either through the MS way, or a way copied (adopted?) from MS.

    1. Re:Embrace and extend? What's the big deal? by anothy · · Score: 1

      the point/problem isn't that Microsoft never has good ideas. XMLHTTP is at least clever (i'm skeptical of the value of cramming all this into HTML/HTTP, but that's an independent discussion), and Microsoft Research has lots of really good minds and puts out some very interesting papers. the problem is in how they get those ideas out to people. they don't care about interoperability and go out of their way to undermine it. look into what they did with their IE badging and developer program trying to get MS-specific HTML extensions onto every web page possible. it wasn't just about getting new ideas out there, but rather about getting people dependent on their software, even for the pre-existing ideas.

      i have no idea what MS's intentions are here; perhaps their RSS stuff is genuinely useful (i'm a comparatively late arrival into the world of RSS, so will reserve judgement), but their history around these extensions is good justification for being skeptical of their goals.

      --

      i speak for myself and those who like what i say.
    2. Re:Embrace and extend? What's the big deal? by anothy · · Score: 1

      i should also point out that the unilateral action behind their introduction of XMLHTTP (like their earlier HTML extensions) lead to (or at the very least contributed strongly to) the emergence of multiple, incompatible implementations in various browsers which persists today.

      --

      i speak for myself and those who like what i say.