Weblogs: Atom

Andrew Grumet FUDs about Atom

Saturday, May 01, 2004

Andrew Grumet, a developer and friend of Dave Winer, has a go at Atom. This proceeds attacks by John Robb, Adam Curry, and the constant Stop Energy efforts of Dave Winer.

When Atom started, I promised myself, and indirectly Sam Ruby, that I wouldn't get involved in the mud-slinging around RSS2.0 and concentrate instead on Atom. Andrew Grumet is one of the few people involved in RSS2.0 I still have respect for, so he deserves a decent reply. This is a reply I made in his comments. I don't intent this sort of post to be a regular thing.

I hope the message will get through.

Crystal clear: anything developers and users want that doesn't comply to the Winer and friends gospel is going to be FUDded to death, regardless of merit. Any improvements to RSS which doesn't originate from Winer and friends will be derailled and attacked in a concerted campaign of "Stop Energy". Nothing could be more clear.

For each new syndication format that becomes popular, we lose an opportunity to get new features.

The opportunities lost was a major drive toward Atom. You are not losing opportunities - you've already lost them because of the shambles around RSS2.0.

Creating a new syndication format - Atom - wasn't the first thing tried - if anything it was a last resort. People have tried and failed to work within the RSS community -- it is unworkable due to the FUD and nonsense starting from scripting.com and working outwards. That prevents ideas from being worked on. RSS2.0 is the reason for the lost opportunities. Atom is an option to bringing back those opportunities.

So there was essentially no choice but to start a new syndication format without this baggage.

Why was MT-Blacklist, perhaps the best de-spamming tool around, built by a third party on donated time and not the vendor?

Why do you have a problem with independant - vendor neutral - developers producing solutions?

Each time they change the default, weblog software developers must scramble to add support for that format whether they like it or not

Is the RSS2.0 specification now not good enough to define what is or isn't a valid feed? Film at 11.

I don't get Six Apart. They've built a product that a lot of people like but seem to be doing everything in their power to kill the market in which that product thrives.

I don't get why people involved in Userland or Dave Winer seem hell bent on alienating a vast number of developers from the syndication space. Six Apart may have the power to kill the market they rely on, but Dave Winer and Co have done significant damage already (for instance, the loss of confidence in RSS as a result of his funky feeds spat - with no details.), yet that goes unmentioned. Interesting.

they [developers] could have spent that time developing something new and exciting instead.

Not within RSS2.0 - its history is littered with failed initiatives. If Winer doesn't like you or doesn't agree, nothing in RSS2.0 succeeds because of the negativity he generates.

Google did a similar, but more evil, thing by using their free Blogspot users to proliferate the Atom format.

So offering a syndication format on a free service that didn't previously offer it is declared evil? There's nothing wrong with proliferating an open format. Aggregators read Atom feeds already. Pity Radio couldn't be bothered to upgrade their aggregator to support Atom.

Blogspot users don't have the ability to add support for other formats

FUD. They never had that ability. Would you prefer Google not offer syndication for these free accounts - would that be not evil? Its utterly amazing that if a company choses not to use RSS2.0, they are branded as evil. Nothing but FUD.

If you want to insist you have a point, why does Radio have no ability to support Atom in its aggregator and feed generator? All the other mainstream aggregators and feed generators do.

Andrew, ask yourself honestly, what do you, Adam Curry, Dave Winer and John Robb have to gain by alienating the content syndication developer community in this way? This animosity you've (plural) crafted in the above post, how is that going to convince people working on Atom to give up and work on RSS2.0 instead? Looking at the number of failed initiatives in RSS2.0, its pretty clear that isn't going to happen.

Alienating people trying to innovate with fresh new ideas isn't a smart tactic. What are you gaining from doing so?

Its been emphasised over and over by you lot about how Atom is doomed to fail. So why not leave it be, stop this FUD and nonsense and let it fail. Surely if its failure is that obvious you don't need to do anything but sit back and watch?

These posts over the last few days from the four of you border on desparation and fear. Certainly not the position of someone convinced of the merits of RSS2.0.

If you like using weblog software and newsreaders, and want this market to survive, I encourage you to get informed, read the arguments, and support RSS.

Wow, no option there of making up your own mind after reading the arguments. Hardly the modicum of unbiasism.

When someone claims that Atom is a more open format, try to get them to explain how a copyright owned by the AtomEnabled Alliance is more open than creative commons share-alike license from Harvard.

FUD. Interesting that Atom is scheduled to be a proposed IETF - a recognised internet standards body - standard in August 2004. Something RSS should have done years ago (guess what stopped that from happening, or should I say whom?). Atom is and always will be a freely available open standard without any vendor dependance.

I see the biggest argument used against Atom is that Radio doesn't support it. Radio is a Userland product, this anti-Atom effort is centered around Userland, its ex-employees and personal friends. Coincidence - I think not.

When someone claims that Atom has a more democratic process, try to get them to describe the process by which decisions are made.

Wiki discussion, mailing list discussion, people taking the initiative to try out different ideas and opening it up for discussion. Broad consensus reached. It is meritocracy based - for example the excellent AtomAPI was initiated by Joe Gregorio, discussed, improved and implemented by others - including myself. Never seen that happen in RSS2.0.

Note that the main figure-heads of Atom have actually not had their way in a number of key decisions. Far more democratic than the RSS2.0 process.

Does every feature idea get a public vote, or are most of the decisions made by a select few.

Public discussion resulting in a broad consensus. Working code goes a lot further than antagonistic remarks.

If every feature gets a public vote, is that really the best way to design software?

Public discussion. More times that not a general feeling of concensus is enough for a decision to be adopted. Seems to be working quite nicely, thanks. If it wasn't a good method, Atom probably wouldn't be as successful as it currently is, and you wouldn't need to FUD as desperately against it.

who pays their salaries?

Who pays my salary has no relevance to Atom. You seem to be under this delusion that all Atom developers are being paid monetary compensation to do so. This is quite wrong. Who payed you to combine BitTorrent and RSS - same thing.

Knowing the identities of the employer companies and their intentions is critical

Who I work for is irrelevant to Atom.

because the companies, not the spec-writers, will own the intellectual property that comes out of the spec effort.

FUD. My employers do not have a claim on the work I invest into Atom.

When someone claims that the Atom has more to do with personalities than technology, take a close look at what each person has accomplished.

Yep, look at all the failed ventures in the RSS2.0 resulting from negative comments and FUD originating from scripting.com. Now look at Atom flourishing because Winer has no hold over it. Crystal clear.

Pay attention instead to the amount of new and useful technology, particularly techology created by other people, that came into being as a direct result of that person's efforts.

Define other people. Atom allows me to explore ideas that are impossible, too difficult or funky if done with RSS2.0.

Stop this FUD. You are so much better than this, Andrew.

Weblogs: Atom

Andrew Grumet FUDs about Atom

Related Reading