intertwingly

Here's the set of changes I would propose to RSS 2.0:

• Items in a RSS 2.0 feed today are unqualified by a namespace.  The proposal is that namespace qualified items to also be supported.  If aggregators are coded correctly, this shouldn't cause any breakage.  True, some may not "see" the new items, just like the way that some don't "see" the relatively new guids.  However, some will work without change, just as many did when scripting.com's 2.0 feed had a namespace.  And the change required to fully support this namespace should be small for those aggregators that require a change at all.
• It would be nice if channels could also be in a namespace.  This could be achieved in the same way.
• Today, the outermost rss element is unqualified by a namespace.  I am explicitly not proposing that this be changed in any way.  In fact, there is no need for the version number inside that element to change.  But if people felt that it was more appropriate to mark such feeds up front as, say, 2.1, then I'm OK with that too.
• What should the namespace be?  I could propose one of my own, and while that would be technically legal, morally it would feel like stealing to me.  I would prefer that either Dave Winer proposed one, or that one be established as a part of the IETF standardization process.
• Should there be one namespace or multiple?  Nothing above indicated that the same namespace need be used throughout, just that unqualified elements still need to be accepted.  Perhaps it might make sense to identify a core and to group related elements?  Perhaps not.  I don't feel strongly about this one.
• Should the existing specification be tightened up in terms of what is allowable?  IMHO, no.  Not if it is done in a way that makes existing feeds invalid.

= = =

Summary: At a minimum, I'd like to see an optional namespace be identified for items.  Ideally, this would work for channels too.  Nothing more need be done.