In the beginning, web pages were text-only. They had a few options for styling, but nothing too fancy. Then came images, tables, Flash, Java, JavaScript, CSS, and oh, let's not forget everyone's favorite: the blink tag! Thus arose the occupation "web designer", the one who specialized in making web pages look great in every version of every brand of web browser.

In the beginning, newsfeeds were text only. They had no options for styling. Then came images, HTML content (including everyone's favorite: the blink tag! Fortunately, not all feed readers support it). Thus arose the occupation "web feed designer" or "newsfeed designer" or ... allow me to digress for a moment. I have a new idea for a meta-name for RSS, Atom, Info Bite, etc.: "digest" formats. I haven't decided yet whether even I will try using it, but for many feeds, I do think it's perfectly descriptive, and it's more accessible than terms like "syndication".

Getting back to today's topic. Will we see the rise of ... let's try it out, "digest designers"? Will digests remain largely unstyled or minimally styled? Or as the corporate world embraces them, will the marketing department demand that they be properly adorned to convey the image the company wishes to communicate? Will reader software have the capability of rendering fully styled feeds? (Okay, I'm back to the more familiar terminology.) Will it take a specialist to design feeds that render well in all the popular readers? It seems a little sad, but I have a hard time imagining this not happening.

I'm all for freedom of choice. If someone wants to publish a feed that includes all the whizbang junk they have on their website, more power to them. What concerns me is that this may become the norm, and un- or minimally styled feeds may end up looking cheap, even to those of us who want them to remain fairly plain. Will those of us who want to publish light-weight, plain feeds lose the option of doing so without losing our audience? How can we ensure that this doesn't happen?

Today, I have more questions than answers. In fact, I just have one answer: profiles. Perhaps we should develop profiles to codify what HTML elements a feed reader needs to be able to render. If there's a standard out there, people will be at least a little more likely to author their feeds to match it. Reader developers will have "official" justification for refusing to support tags that aren't in the profile. Of course, if a reader wants to support tags not found in the profile, that's fine. The point is to create a little unmoving mass to help us resist unwanted "progress".

If we do want to resist heavy styling of feeds, then this is an issue that we need to address early, before things get going in a direction we don't want them to go. Because once they've gone, they're not going to come back.