Discussing technology related to blog, inevitably, RSS, this abbreviation can have several sources in English, and are different from different technical groups. It can be "Rich Site Summary", or "RDF Site Summary" or "Really Simple Syndication". Why is there so many meanings? This is also about the relationship between RSS today. Today, someone still remembers an interesting feature when IE 4 just pushed, that is, news channel. The function of this news channel is very similar to the news channel launched by Netscape (at that time, Netscape or market browser). To this end, Netscape defines a set of languages that describe the news channel, this is RSS, but Netscape has worseful since the time, so it has not issued a formal RSS specification (only a 0.9 version only). Microsoft also launched the CDF (Channel Definition Format) data specifications that supported its IE, very close to RSS. Microsoft attempts to use news channels to turn "push" technology into an application mainstream and compete with Netscape. However, it is predicted that "push" technology did not find a suitable business model from beginning to end, and accompanied by the emergence of other network features, it is also increasingly unable to show its own advantages. The status of news channels in the browser ultimate day Xishan, and finally disappeared in the subsequent version of IE. The news channel has indeed entered the trough, but the RSS is not abandoned by the industry. In the past two years, Blog has gradually become the most popular new topic on the Internet from a professional group. RSS has the most basic method describing the BLOG subject and update information. Then RSS technology is taken over by the famous Blogger / Geek Dave Winner, continues to develop new versions to adapt to new web applications. The new web application is Blog, because Dave Wenna's efforts, RSS upgrade to version 0.91, then reached 0.92 version, then it is applied in various BLOG tools and is supported by many professional news sites. During a wide range of applications, many professionals recognize that they need to organize and develop RSS a generic specification and further standardize. A joint team redefines RSS based on the W3C's new generation of Semantic Network Technology RSS, releases RSS 1.0, and defines RSS as "RDF Site Summary". This work did not effectively communicate with Dave Wenna, while Daifei adheres to further developing RSS's subsequent versions in the direction of their own ideas, and does not recognize the effectiveness of RSS 1.0. The RSS thus started to form an RSS 0.9x / 2.0 and RSS 1.0 two camps, which also caused a wide argument in the professional population. Because of the existence of debate, the RSS 1.0 has not become the true standard of standardized organizations. Dave Wennai upgraded RSS to version 2.0 in September 2002, which is completely new mode and does not have any RSS 1.0 shadow. This triggered further controversy on the Internet, making an increasingly popular data format be an open standard, or is defined and controlled by a company, it has become a controversial focus. Dave Wenna did not argue for himself. His view is that RSS also needs further development. It is necessary to make a more clear definition, but I am afraid that this kind of low-altitude is not able to eliminate people's concerns about RSS "by a commercial company."
