http://www.scripting.com/ A weblog about scripting and stuff like that. en-us http://radio.weblogs.com/0001015/userland/scriptingNewsLeftLinks.opml http://radio.weblogs.com/0001015/gems/mySubscriptions.opml http://diveintomark.org/ Copyright 1997-2002 Dave Winer Sun, 24 Nov 2002 12:00:01 GMT http://backend.userland.com/rss Radio UserLand v8.0.5 1765 rssUpdates dave@userland.com dave@userland.com 8 9 10 11 12 4 5 6 7 480 Back in California. Tired, emotionally reamed. Lots of growth. Life will never be normal again, it seems. Sat, 23 Nov 2002 23:27:51 GMT http://scriptingnews.userland.com/backissues/2002/11/23#When:3:27:51PM Nice thing about the iPod for cross-continental travel. The battery with a full charge gets you from SFO to JFK and back, with juice to spare. Sun, 24 Nov 2002 04:13:50 GMT http://scriptingnews.userland.com/backissues/2002/11/23#When:8:13:50PM <a href="http://diveintomark.org/archives/2002/11/22.html#debate">Mark Pilgrim mistakenly</a> thought that my <a href="http://scriptingnews.userland.com/backissues/2002/11/21#restVsSoap">quotes</a> on REST vs SOAP were intended to be something other than bluster. It was for an industry trade magazine. Those are the only kinds of quotes they use. Believe me they don't get <a href="http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=syllogism">syllogistic</a>. Anyway, here's the gist of what I was saying. If you want to make it easy for developers to try out your web service, your absolute best bet is to provide an XML-RPC interface. There's the least variability in what that means, and the greatest wealth of <a href="http://www.xmlrpc.com/directory/1568/implementations">toolkits</a> to choose from that factor out most of the gritty details for you. By and large REST interfaces don't tell you how to serialize and deserialize complex structures, so you kind of start from scratch every time. If they use a SOAP encoding, you get some of that. But there just is nothing simpler than saying "Here's the XML-RPC interface, and some sample code in a few of the popular scripting languages." If you want developers to get going quickly, avoid the religious wars, just support XML-RPC. Now even this isn't bluster-free. Think of it as evangelism. Have a nice day. ";->" Sat, 23 Nov 2002 23:49:18 GMT http://scriptingnews.userland.com/backissues/2002/11/23#When:3:49:18PM <a href="http://www.truerwords.net/2631">Seth Dillingham wants to know</a> if there are any aggregators that are broken by RSS 2.0. This is a good question, and I think the answer is no. UserLand went first here, we switched Radio over to RSS 2.0 in Sept, and it uses non-trivial features that are only found in 2.0. Sat, 23 Nov 2002 23:31:33 GMT http://scriptingnews.userland.com/backissues/2002/11/23#When:3:31:33PM BTW, every 0.91 feed is also a 2.0 feed, so a simple way to dip your toe in the water with 2.0 is to simply change the version number on your feed from 0.91 to 2.0. The same is true of 0.92 and 2.0. Also remember, if you're using the <docs> element, to update it to point to the appropriate spec. Sat, 23 Nov 2002 23:39:39 GMT http://scriptingnews.userland.com/backissues/2002/11/23#When:3:39:39PM