Textpattern CMS support forum
You are not logged in. Register | Login | Help
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
#16 2006-03-11 20:37:37
- NyteOwl
- Member
- From: Nova Scotia, Canada
- Registered: 2005-09-24
- Posts: 539
Re: Assignment: RSS and Atom tests, take 2
zem wrote:
N: the chances of RSS 1.0 are exactly the same as 2.0. Show us what the RSS 1.0 feed output should look like, given the tricky situations demonstrated in the articles linked above. Until then, the chances of 1.0, 2.0, and anything else, are exactly zero.
Ok, just to make sure we’re on the same page: you want a properly constructed RSS 1.0 feed using the sample data in the first post?
Obsolescence is just a lack of imagination. / 36-bits Forever! / #include <disclaimer.h>;
Offline
#17 2006-03-11 20:45:24
- Mary
- Sock Enthusiast
- Registered: 2004-06-27
- Posts: 6,236
Re: Assignment: RSS and Atom tests, take 2
Look through the existing feeds he gave, and make corrections. The sample data is provided so you can be sure of where the data came from (like let’s say data was incorrectly placed) and what it looked like originally.
…examine these XML feeds, compare them with the sample articles, and tell us where things are wrong, and what the output should be.
Offline
#18 2006-03-12 01:41:28
- NyteOwl
- Member
- From: Nova Scotia, Canada
- Registered: 2005-09-24
- Posts: 539
Re: Assignment: RSS and Atom tests, take 2
There are no sample feeds for RSS 1.0, which is what I was refering to. That is using the provided sample data – what should a proper RSS1.0 feed look like?
Obsolescence is just a lack of imagination. / 36-bits Forever! / #include <disclaimer.h>;
Offline
#19 2006-03-12 02:29:11
- Mary
- Sock Enthusiast
- Registered: 2004-06-27
- Posts: 6,236
Re: Assignment: RSS and Atom tests, take 2
Doy, now I’m catching up with you. Yes, I believe that’s what Alex is saying.
What would the benefit(s) of RSS 1.0 be over the others?
Offline
#20 2006-03-12 20:29:49
- NyteOwl
- Member
- From: Nova Scotia, Canada
- Registered: 2005-09-24
- Posts: 539
Re: Assignment: RSS and Atom tests, take 2
RSS 1.0 followed W3 standards for creating rdf type documents within a generic RSS framework. The other RSS flavours were created from scratch and any “standards” that they seem to have are based more on building on the way person X did it rather than any particular well defined protocol – hence the wide fragmentation and incompatibilities among many otherwise similar RSS versions. 2.0 has become pretty pervasive but it’s basically an extension of .92.
The history of RSS evolution (development is too structured a word to use) is rather convoluted. Witness Atom – which came about because someone wasn’t happy with the RSS approach :) Then there are ESF and RSD flavours of syndication ;-)
To quote Robert A. Heinlein, “All cats are NOT grey after midnight – endless variety.”
If my assumption was correct, I’ll grab the sample data and work on getting an RSS 1.0 compatible feed structure for it. I’ll try and make it 1.1 compatible too (addresses some redundancy issues in 1.0).
The one thing that might limit the usefulness of 1.0 for some people is that the < description > field has a limit of 500 characters, pretty much restricing it to excerpts, except for shorter articles.
Obsolescence is just a lack of imagination. / 36-bits Forever! / #include <disclaimer.h>;
Offline