intertwingly

Shelley Powers: I appreciate Sam's effort, though I think it's important to note that the RSS 0.9x and the RSS 1.0 efforts are following two separate and not necessarily parallel paths.  Why?  It seems to me that there is a common core that they both share.  It seems to me that if we can get past the squabbling over what the outermost element name is and whether items have a life independent of channels, it would seem to me that everybody would be free to innovate however they like in the safe and comfy confines of their own namespaces.