Too early for a specification? " I think it's a little soon to try writing an audioblogging spec as such. We're still scratching out what we need to consider, and without real world usage half our guesses are going to be wrong.
As we all start hammering out working audioblogging systems, I strongly suspect it'll all coalesce into place. What everything does is convention, and what only some things do is competitive differentiation. So long as we make the conventional stuff play together politely, we'll have done our jobs. First, though, we have to get some working systems together. "
Since I think I'm the one who started this thread, I thought I should comment on what I was thinking.
I agree that for a true or classic standard it is much to early. I guess the word standardization is to strong a word in the field these days. Maybe best practices is what I mean.
My thoughts were more along the lines of the sharing of ideas with the early audioblogging community as well as keeping our eyes toward interoperability of our systems.
A sorta living document as we go approach.
As we sort things out, at some point we will have to nail some things down.
Without getting formal we can just use our blogs and keep a punch list of the issues as we progress.
At some point there will be opportunities and remembering how we got to this point will be inportant.
