Everybody keeps telling me that they would be in favor of using RSS 1.0 or RSS 2.0 as the object/data model for Atom API, but that they don't think it's feasible, as the community is anti-RDF. Well, I'm anti-RDF, but I'd prefer RDF to the current Atom syntax. Why re-invent the wheel? Why not respect prior art?
Yes, we all laugh when we hear the term "Semantic Web", but that doesn't mean RSS 1.0 is bad. Sure it has semantics that we don't think will ever take off, but why not give the Semantic Web a chance, regardless of whether you know or not that it's doomed. Give RDF a chance. To think, iM the one that is calling for re-use of RDF. Give me a break!
Why not use RDF? Cause RDF doesn't have constructs that are in the Atom syntax? Then write an extension module and get on w/ writing application instead of re-inventing the wheel. More spec. More spec. More spec. Three syndication formats. Three blogging APIs. Three Web RPCs.
The solution is to merge RSS 1.0 w/ the Atom initiative. Give the whole pie to the IETF and let them (the working group) figure it out.
Update: I think today I finally realized the problem w/ RDF. Talking via several forums w/ RDF people, they don't seem very convinced in RDF. Although they tout, they shy away quickly. There's no real passion in what they are doing. They seem to have a doubt that the RDF thing can work. That's too bad. Dave Winer has passion. I guess that's why he won.