Sam's wiki discussion continues full throttle. We have a name – it's Echo. Numerous people are in support of the roadmap. SixApart, Blogger and LiveJournal have all said they support this effort. Even logos are appearing. Excellent.
Trying to follow it is a full time job which has my head hurting and too spent to for words or any real interesting analysis. Shelley Powers makes an excellent post to summarize the action so far:
One only has to look at the change log to see the number of edits to realize that this is not an evironment for the cautious, the tame, or the wiki-challenged (or for those who want to sleep or eat, either). I'm not necessarily cautious or tame, but I do raise my hand for being wiki-challenged. Still, there are points that are solidifying out at the wiki, and I thought to duplicate these here in a format that, if nothing else, will help me understand what it's all about.
Well put Shelley and thank you. My head hurts a little bit less after reading your well done summary. The discussion of what is known as Echo has become been engrossing to the point of being detrimental to any other work and what's left of my personality.
Our favorite deity Clay Shirky made a brief appearance on the Echo wiki today and wrote:
Right now, the conversation looks muddled, because a lot of questions that were asked and answered in the development of RSS itself (it should be 7 bit; it should be represented in XML; _required_ metadata should be kept at a minimum; it should not try to be an input to the Semantic Web) are coming up again, to no good effect, imo.
In his reply Sam Ruby makes an interesting reply that intruiges me a lot more then the rest of the syntax discussions: One possible use of this analysis would be to produce a proper usage profile of RSS.
The conversation and collaboration on the Echo wiki has been nothing short of amazing and the result good so far, but I am curious to whether this loose fast paced collaboration can produce something practical.
In a comment on his weblog, Sam writes the pace does seem dizzying at the moment. I would like to see the result be something that we would feel comfortable living with for quite some time.
Agreed. We shall see where this sometimes wild ride takes us.
<p>Sam's <a href="http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/FrontPage">wiki</a> discussion continues full throttle. We have a name – it's Echo. Numerous people are in support of the <a href="http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/RoadMap">roadmap</a>. SixApart, Blogger and LiveJournal have all said they support this effort. Even <a href="http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/EchoEnabled">logos</a> are appearing. Excellent. </p>
<p>Trying to follow it is a full time job which has my head hurting and too spent to for words or any real interesting analysis. Shelley Powers makes <a href="http://weblog.burningbird.net/fires/001306.htm">an excellent post to summarize the action so far</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>One only has to look at the change log to see the number of edits to realize that this is not an evironment for the cautious, the tame, or the wiki-challenged (or for those who want to sleep or eat, either). I'm not necessarily cautious or tame, but I do raise my hand for being wiki-challenged. Still, there are points that are solidifying out at the wiki, and I thought to duplicate these here in a format that, if nothing else, will help me understand what it's all about. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Well put Shelley and thank you. My head hurts a little bit less after reading your well done summary. The discussion of what is known as Echo has become been engrossing to the point of being detrimental to any other work and what's left of my personality. </p>
<p>Our favorite deity Clay Shirky made a brief appearance on the Echo wiki today and <a href="http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/Motivation">wrote</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Right now, the conversation looks muddled, because a lot of questions that were asked and answered in the development of RSS itself (it should be 7 bit; it should be represented in XML; _required_ metadata should be kept at a minimum; it should not try to be an input to the Semantic Web) are coming up again, to no good effect, imo. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>In his reply Sam Ruby makes an interesting reply that intruiges me a lot more then the rest of the syntax discussions: <q>One possible use of this analysis would be to produce a proper usage profile of RSS.</q> </p>
<p>The conversation and collaboration on the Echo wiki has been nothing short of amazing and the result good so far, but I am curious to whether this loose fast paced collaboration can produce something practical. </p>
<p>In a comment on his weblog, Sam <a href="http://www.intertwingly.net/blog/1490.html#c1056591703">writes</a> <q>the pace does seem dizzying at the moment. I would like to see the result be something that we would feel comfortable living with for quite some time.</q></p>
<p>Agreed. We shall see where this sometimes wild ride takes us.</p>
Leave a comment