Re: Re: My take on shared feed lists

> I think this is where I'm getting lost.  In short, I don't understand why
> non-blog sites are any different from blog sites.

I'm with you, there's no techncial reason to differentiate them.  That's
something that
could be done via other mechanisms.

> While there's definitely a difference between per-site and per-blog (or
> per-category or whatever), will it really happen that all the feeds would be
> available only from the root domain, even on a non-blog site?
>
> While I can see a non-blog site wanting to provide a list of every single
> feed available on example.com, wouldn't it also make sense that they would
> want to provide a subset of that list, say for all sports-related feeds, at
> example.com/sports?  And then all NBA feeds at example.com/sports/nba?

Unless you're not using English, which most of the world doesn't.

> Once you get there, there isn't much difference between blog and non-blog
> sites.  The features are so similar, planning only for the top-level
> supposedly desired by a non-blog site doesn't seem that it would make a
> bunch of sense.  Surely we can implement something that would be usable at
> any level of the tree in either situation.
>
> It would also seem that whether those are feeds within an area (ie, team
> feeds under NBA), surely something like this could handle different feed
> formats (rss 1.0/rdf vs rss 2.0 vs atom) or layouts (excerpts only vs. full
> feeds) of the same content.

Yep, but consider the idea of using XPaths for this instead of a static URL.

-Bill Kearney
Syndic8.com


 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/