Monday, October 15, 2007


In Nick Bradbury's announcement for APML support he says:
For that reason, I proposed an attention namespace for OPML - basically a way to store attention data within OPML. But that idea also never caught on for various reasons.

I wonder what the reasons are for attention name space for OPML not catching on?

Reading Dave Winer's blog I came across this bit:
As Pete Cashmore on Mashable says, it's because the subscriber numbers don't reflect actual readership. The people who subscribed may not even be aware that they are subscribed. Or put another way, we haven't learned yet how to measure what's valuable, we only have the crudest ways to measure value, so crude as to be meaningless.

Wouldn't attention data help to fine tune 'actual readership', making the data more useful?