[tw] : RFC: Really Simple Discovery

“RFC: Really Simple Discovery”
From:	Seth Dillingham	In Response To:	Top of Thread.
Date Posted:	Tuesday, November 12, 2002 6:41:07 PM	Replies:	1

Enclosures:	None.

Daniel Berlinger posted an RFC a couple weeks ago called Really Simple Discovery. He's trying to design a communication between desktop weblog editor apps and weblog servers, to automate the configuration of the editor for a specific weblog.

There are lots of desktop apps out there now for editing your weblog with something other than a browser. Archipelago, written by Daniel, is one. Sid, by Steve Ivy, is another. Brent is working on NetNewsWire Pro, which will include an editor. Radio has built-in support for both the MetaWeblog and Blogger API's (as both the client and the server). The list goes on and on...

Every one of these apps needs to be configured for the weblog you want to edit, and that config info is formatted for the software that runs the weblog. There's no way to guess the config info for one weblog just by knowing the config for another on some other platform.

That's the problem Daniel is trying to solve, and it's one that needs to be solved. The servers know what they need to receive from these desktop weblog editors, so they might as well tell the app directly instead of forcing them to enter it all by hand.

I don't think the current RFC is complete enough, but it's a start and that's exactly what we need.

If you're working on an editor that would benefit from this, or even if you just use such an editor and would like to have the setup process be automated, please post your thoughts on Daniel's site. You could even post them here, if you prefer: I'll make sure he sees them.

Discussion Thread:

RSD Notes (by Seth Dillingham at 11/14/2002)

I told Daniel that I'd have comments on RSD . I'm really busy right now, but he's trying to get this
- RE: RSD Notes (by Daniel Berlinger at 11/14/2002)
  
  >> Should it just say what API's are supported by the weblog? I thought that the API most likely to
  - RE: RSD Notes (by Seth Dillingham at 11/15/2002)
    
    On 11/14/02, Daniel Berlinger said: >>Should it just say what API's are supported by the weblog? > >I
    - RE: RSD Notes (by Daniel Berlinger at 11/15/2002)
      
      >>>Would a sample handshake document help here? I'm willing to put one together to demonstrate. ("Hand
      - Sample RSD Document (by Seth Dillingham at 11/19/2002)
        
        Here's the sample RSD document that I promised Daniel I'd write. It's still very simple, but it allows
        
        Re: Sample RSD Document (by Jim Roepcke at 11/20/2002)
        
        On Tuesday, November 19, 2002, at 05:41 PM, Seth Dillingham wrote: > Here's the sample RSD document
        
        The "Value" of My RSD Approach... (by Seth Dillingham at 11/20/2002)
        
        Brent and Daniel are having a conversation about RSD on Daniel's site. Brent's planning to support something
        
        Re: The "Value" of My RSD Approach... (by Brent Simmons at 11/20/2002)
        
        About keeping it maximally simple -- my approach when doing the first version of something like this
        
        Re: The "Value" of My RSD Approach... (by Brent Simmons at 11/20/2002)
        
        >What doesn't it solve? It solves the questions NetNewsWire has -- what APIs are supported, what's the
        
        RE: The "Value" of My RSD Approach... (by Seth Dillingham at 11/20/2002)
        
        On 11/20/02, Brent Simmons said: >Another issue -- how do we discover the discovery? Daniel mentioned
        
        RE: The "Value" of My RSD Approach... (by Daniel Berlinger at 11/21/2002)
        
        I've folded your ideas in Seth, and have moved some elements around. This should make it possible for
        
        RE: The "Value" of My RSD Approach... (by Brent Simmons at 11/21/2002)
        
        The only possible nit I'm seeing with the latest XML example on Daniel's page now is that in some cases
        
        RE: The "Value" of My RSD Approach... (by Seth Dillingham at 11/21/2002)
        
        On 11/21/02, Brent Simmons said: >The only possible nit I'm seeing with the latest XML example on > Daniel's
        
        RE: The "Value" of My RSD Approach... (by Brent Simmons at 11/21/2002)
        
        >The same goes for all of the attributes/elements: one or the other. No need for that kind of flexibility,
        
        RE: The "Value" of My RSD Approach... (by Daniel Berlinger at 11/21/2002)
        
        Allrighty, blogID is an attribute. Should all the attributes be required? Maybe blogID should be optional?
        
        RE: The "Value" of My RSD Approach... (by Daniel Berlinger at 11/21/2002)
        
        Allrighty, blogID is an attribute. Should all the attributes be required? Maybe blogID should be optional?
        
        RE: The "Value" of My RSD Approach... (by Daniel Berlinger at 11/21/2002)
        
        Allrighty, blogID is an attribute. Should all the attributes be required? Maybe blogID should be optional?
- RSD Moving to 1.0 (by Seth Dillingham at 12/17/2002)
  
  Daniel just sent out an email to inform interested parties that, tomorrow morning, RSD is moving to
  - Re: RSD Moving to 1.0 (by Jim Roepcke at 12/18/2002)
    
    On Tuesday, December 17, 2002, at 12:26 PM, Seth Dillingham wrote: > Can't let this end on a sour note,
  - RSD 1.0 in Conversant's Weblogs (by Seth Dillingham at 12/18/2002)
    
    RSD is now fully supported in both types of Conversant's weblogs: the "old ones" (which is all that's

Trackbacks:

There are no trackbacks.

Search TruerWords

“RFC: Really Simple Discovery”