RE: rdf vs. rss
Jeff Marshall <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.mail.archives.mail-archive |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
More details for those that asked: rdf and xml (I should've said xml, not rss) are both variations on RSS formats. Each mailing list at The Mail Archive has both feed formats available. For example, the gossip feeds are: rdf: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/maillist.rdf xml: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/maillist.xml The rdf file is the 0.9 standard for rss feeds, while the xml file is the 2.0 standard for rss feeds. If you don't use an rss reader or take advantage of the rss bookmarks in browsers like Firefox, then neither of these matter to you. Our thought is that all modern rss readers support both formats, so we don't see the point in offering both. Just looking for feedback from any others that use the rss feeds. Thanks. Jeff More details: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSS_%28file_format%29 -----Original Message----- From: Jeff Marshall Date: 7/18/06 10:37 am To: [email protected] Subj: [Gossip] rdf vs. rss We currently serve up two flavors of rss on The Mail Archive. Does anybody have a strong preference on which one they use? Does it matter to you? Are they virtually interchangeable? We're considering dropping one. Thanks. Jeff _______________________________________________ Discussion list for The Mail Archive [email protected] http://jab.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gossip _______________________________________________ Discussion list for The Mail Archive [email protected] http://jab.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gossip