<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/1.5.1-alpha" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: OPML sharing with Feedvault</title>
	<link>http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2006/07/11/opml-sharing-with-feedvault/</link>
	<description>sharing ideas thoughts and feedback</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 04:29:30 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1-alpha</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: Matt Terenzio</title>
		<link>http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2006/07/11/opml-sharing-with-feedvault/#comment-31291</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Jul 2006 14:50:17 +0100</pubDate>
		<guid>http://libraryclips.blogsome.com/2006/07/11/opml-sharing-with-feedvault/#comment-31291</guid>
					<description>John,

I'm not sure that all the players are going to act quickly on this. 
In reality, all we need is for subscribing to OPML to become as standard as subscribing to RSS, then we can choose where our master list resides.
But despite all the talk of openness, many of these companies cling to the&quot;roach motel&quot; model with our data.
Not BlogBridge, as you mention.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>John,</p>
	<p>I&#8217;m not sure that all the players are going to act quickly on this.<br />
In reality, all we need is for subscribing to OPML to become as standard as subscribing to RSS, then we can choose where our master list resides.<br />
But despite all the talk of openness, many of these companies cling to the&#8221;roach motel&#8221; model with our data.<br />
Not BlogBridge, as you mention.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
