Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

RssCloud Atom Extension

September 11, 2009

Status of this Document

Version: 0.92 DRAFT
Editor: Mason Lee <http://masonlee.org>
Updated: 2009-09-23

Change log:

0.92 – 2009-09-23. Updated link to RSS spec.
0.91 – 2009-09-16. Changed namespace proposal to rssboard.org and updated editor’s notes.
0.9 – 2009-09-11. Original proposal and request for comments.

Abstract

This document defines the XML schema for an rssCloud declaration usable in XML formats other than RSS, with specific attention to Atom.

1. Overview

RSS 2.0 specifies an optional <cloud> element that can be used to indicate the rssCloud ping hub for a channel. Because RSS 2.0 has no XML namespace, however, direct reuse of its elements can often be difficult and sometimes impossible. To allow alternative XML publishing formats such as Atom to more easily make use of RssCloud’s ping hub architecture, this document declares an equivalent <rss:cloud> element definition rooted in a URI namespace.

The specification here adopts without modification the original RSS 2.0 <cloud> element base name, attribute names, element structure, and semantics. The rssCloud protocol is not modified here except perhaps indirectly by the implication that rssCloud hubs may forward update pings for resources other than RSS.

1.1. References

“RSS 2.0″ is defined at http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/rss/rss.html.

The “rssCloud” protocol is described at http://rsscloud.org/walkthrough.html. EDITOR’S NOTE: What’s the best link for this?

“Atom” is defined at http://atompub.org/rfc4287.html.

2. Technical Specification

2.1. Namespace

The XML namespace URI for the XML data described in this specification is:

http://rssboard.org/2009/xsd/rss2.0

EDITOR’S NOTE: **This is not an approved URL- do not use.**. Rssboard.org has been discussing the creation of a namespace for RSS. Above is my suggestion. Waiting on feedback from them as to what and when an official namespace might be.

2.2. Namespaced rssCloud XML Publisher’s Schema


<xs:schema xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"
 targetNamespace="http://rssboard.org/2009/xsd/rss2.0"
 elementFormDefault="qualified"
 attributeFormDefault="unqualified"
 version="0.9">

 <xs:element name="cloud">
  <xs:complexType>

   <xs:annotation>
    <xs:documentation>Specifies a web service that supports the rssCloud interface which can be implemented in HTTP-POST, XML-RPC or SOAP 1.1. Its purpose is to allow processes to register with a cloud to be notified of updates to the channel, implementing a lightweight publish-subscribe protocol for XML resources.</xs:documentation>
   </xs:annotation>
   <xs:attribute name="domain" type="xs:string" use="required"/>
   <xs:attribute name="port" type="xs:positiveInteger" use="required"/>
   <xs:attribute name="path" type="xs:string" use="required"/>
   <xs:attribute name="registerProcedure" type="xs:string"
use="required"/>

   <xs:attribute name="protocol" use="required"/>

    <xs:simpleType>
     <xs:restriction base="xs:string">
      <xs:enumeration value="xml-rpc"/>
      <xs:enumeration value="http-post"/>
      <xs:enumeration value="soap"/>
     </xs:restriction>
    </xs:simpleType>
   </xs:attribute>
  </xs:complexType>
 </xs:element>
</xs:schema>

2.3. Use in Atom

Implementer MAY use one or more of the above namespaced <cloud> elements directly inside the <atom:feed> element.

2.4. Use in RSS

Implementer SHOULD use the existing non-namespaced RSS <cloud> element in RSS rather than this extension.

3. Examples

3.1. Atom Example

<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
 xmlns:rss="http://rssboard.org/2009/xsd/rss2.0">
  <rss:cloud domain="example.com" port="80"
   path="/?rsscloud=notify" registerProcedure=""
   protocol="http-post"/>

  <title>Example Feed</title>
  <link href="http://example.org/feed/" rel="self" />
  <link href="http://example.org/" />
  <id>urn:uuid:8f8f8f8f-adad-face-090909090909</id>
  <updated>2003-12-13T18:30:02Z</updated>
  <author>
    <name>John Doe</name>
    <email>johndoe@example.com</email>
  </author>
  <entry>
    <title>Atom-Powered Robots Run Amok</title>
    <link href="http://example.org/2003/12/13/atom03" />
    <id>urn:uuid:1225c695-cfb8-4ebb-80da344efa6a</id>
    <updated>2003-12-13T18:30:02Z</updated>
    <summary>Some text.</summary>
  </entry>

</feed>

EDITOR’S NOTE: Comments most welcome! –Mason

Stimulating Concepts of Commerce

December 1, 2008

Below, from “A Confederacy of Dunces” by John Kennedy Toole, Ignatius J. Reilly takes business into his own hands and forges a response to Abelman’s Dry Goods.

Abelman’s Dry Goods
Kansas City, Missouri
U.S.A.

Mr. I. Abelman, Mongoloid, Esq.:

We have received via post your absurd comments about our trousers, the comments revealing, as they did, your total lack of contact with reality. Were you more aware, you would know or realize by now that the offending trousers were dispatched to you with our full knowledge that they were inadequate so far as length was concerned.

“Why? Why?” You are, in your incomprehensible babble, unable to assimilate stimulating concepts of commerce into your retarded and blighted worldview. The trousers were sent to you (1) as a means of testing your initiative (A clever, wide-awake business concern should be able to make three-quarter-length trousers a byword of masculine fashion. Your advertising and merchandising programs are obviously faulty.) and (2) as a means of testing your ability to meet the standards requisite in a distributor of our quality product. (Our loyal and dependable outlets can vend any trouser bearing the Levy label no matter how abominable their design and construction. You are apparently a faithless people.)

We do not wish to be bothered in the future by such tedious complaints. Please confine your correspondence to orders only. We are a busy and dynamic organization whose mission needless effrontery and harassment can only hinder. If you molest us again, sir, you may feel the sting of the lash across your pitiful shoulders.

Yours in anger,
Gus Levy, Pres.

Arrington’s Email Address Unusable in Andromeda Galaxy?

May 16, 2008

Super interesting Gillmore Group podcast today, if a little hot-headed at times. This has to be my new favorite podcast. Link.

At one point, about 45 minutes in, the group starts talking about the now famous(?) incident-turned-thought-experiment where Robert Scoble had used Plaxo to scrape an email address off one of his friend’s Facebook profile (Michael Arrington’s).

The basic problem is this: If Arrington had his way, Scoble would be able to enter Arrington’s secret email address into Gmail, because Arrington trusts Gmail. But Scoble wouldn’t be able to enter the secret email address into Plaxo, because Arrington doesn’t trust Plaxo.

To achieve this programmatically, we’d want a data-sharing framework set up whereby the secret email address would be wrapped a protective permissions blanket that would automatically prevent unwanted people from seeing it and using it. Only too bad the Gillmor Group didn’t talk about how this permission system would work, because I think the devil is in the details. Such a system would be an example of Digital Rights Management (“Code is Law!”); and through this system Arrington avoids having to take Scoble to court because the secret email address manages itself. Don’t we all love DRM?

So what might the DRM permission system look like? I was thinking about one straw man proposal and it got me cringing: What if it were a white-list. Then Arrington could block Plaxo? But how would it work when Scoble wants to enter Arrington’s secret email address into some completely new web system that Arrington doesn’t know whether he trusts or not? ((i.e. Can he play his dvd on linux? no.)) It doesn’t work.

Worse, take the white-list straw man into the future with an analogy for distributed computer systems: What happens if Scoble leaves the galaxy with Arrington’s protected secret, and meets an alien email system that purports to be able to send email privately AND faster than light. Scoble trusts it, and boy, what a great way to call home! But is he allowed to enter Arrington’s secret address? Or does he have to wait 22 million light years to get an updated permission set from Arrington? The white-list straw man doesn’t scale, and it impedes progress.

Hopefully the Gillmor Group will be telling us about DRM that does work soon.

Seems to me that the most useful permission system would allow for a sort of weighted transitive trust network. Returning finally to the original incident about the facebook-scraped email, here are my two cents: If someone provides you with their email address, the typical understanding is one of transitive trust: “Here’s my email address, I want you to have it. Use whatever software you use, but protect my data like you’d protect your own.” In this light at least, Scoble wasn’t wrong; he was just using his address book software.

Privacy == Can of worms.