Very much agree and glad you wrote this. It's apparently trendy to emphasise how web pages should be short to cater for the reduced attention spans of the kids of today. That always feels a bit too cargo-cultish.

Longer, interesting pieces are worth reading and, often, worth writing for the feedback one receives and the opportunity to organise something larger than a micro-thought. I'm somewhere in-between your usage and the Twitter-junkies, I suspect. I use my aggregator to, well, aggregate. Some of what I collect is for now, some for later reading, some as food for thought and some for collecting. The latter categories are important. Those of us with the ability and inclination to write shouldn't feel bad about doing so; seems fair to assume there will always be readers, even of the longer pieces.

what exactly is too complex for JSON? you can give your JSON objects a URI and use the key/value fields as predicate/objects respectively. voila, RDF

granted it lacks a URI literal in the syntax ,something i'd like to see and seeminlgy ignored in ECMA4 despite the fact that JS/JSON is 'the' language of the web...

"I want to be able to pass structured data around, data that's too richly structured for JSON to be of any practical value and data that isn't typically HTML. I could (and have) invented my own data formats and my own APIs, but rarely as robustly and completely as Atom and AtomPub."

I'd be interested in more on this topic please Norm? "Pass around"? within your own PC setup or something else?

I.e. how Atom|AtomPub meet this need?

DaveP