Re: The Profile and the Feed Validator

If you're going to give advice, put it in a feed advisor not a feed
validator. You're confusing a lot of people who just want to use RSS
and don't want to get involved in your life Sam. 

Helping with relative urls and multiple enclosures is, imho,
constructive. Telling them that their managingEditor and webMaster
elements need fixing when they don't and telling them to include the
Atom 1.0 namespace (!) is not constructive, just confusing.

Did the members of the "advisory board" know this would be the upshot
of their voting in favor of the profile?? I kind of doubt they did.



--- In [email protected], Sam Ruby <rubys@...> wrote:
>
> rcade wrote:
> > 
> > We will vigorously defend the profile's guidance. By calling this
> > stuff the best practices for RSS, we're opening ourselves up to
> > challenge whenever we run into an implementer who believes otherwise.
> > I think that's a dialogue we ought to be having in the RSS community.
> > If the validator reinforces our advice, it will force the issue on all
> > of the big stuff -- enclosures, relative URLs, yadda yadda yadda.
> 
> Continuing this discussion, the validator and the profile are already
> largely aligned on two of the "big stuff" items: enclosures and relative
> URLs.  As far as titles goes, here's a first pass at tests for how an
> ampersand should be coded:
> 
>   = = =
> 
> Conforming to the profile:
> 
> <title>AT&#x26;T</title>
> 
> Not conforming to the profile:
> 
> <title>AT&amp;T</title>
> <title>AT&#38;T</title>
> <title>AT&amp;#x26;T</title>
> <title>AT&amp;#38;T</title>
> <title>AT&amp;amp;T</title>
> <title><![CDATA[AT&T]]></title>
> <title><![CDATA[AT&amp;T]]></title>
> 
> Conforming to the profile, and therefore produce no warning, but may not
> produce what you expect:
> 
> <title>AT&#x26;amp;T</title>
> 
> Unclear whether the following conforms or not, so probably does not
> produce warnings:
> 
> <title>AT&#X26;T</title>
> <title><![CDATA[AT&#x26;T]]></title>
> 
>   = = =
> 
> The reason why I am being so explicit about this up front is simple: I
> honestly don't think many of the existing producers of RSS 2.0 feeds
> will produce feeds that conform to this aspect of the profile.  I also
> suspect that conforming to the profile in this area may not be as easy
> as you might expect.  I realize that the profile has not been ratified,
> but IMHO, an exercise each of the board members should undertake before
> they cast a vote is to create a single weblog post in each of their
> respective blogs that contains either a ampersand or a less than sign in
> a title and then see what it takes to make their feed conform to the
> proposed profile.  A concrete and current example that involves both a
> board member and feedburner can be found here:
> 
>    http://feeds.feedburner.com/Iblogthere4im
> 
> Again, let me emphasize that I fully realize that the profile has not
> yet been ratified.  I'm just suggesting that it might be a good idea to 
> lead by example in this area, particularly now that the voting on this 
> matter is about to start.
> 
> If it would help in this exercise, I could deploy a version of the feed
> validator that has been updated to perform these checks at
> beta.feedvalidator.org.
> 
> - Sam Ruby
>




 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rss-public/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rss-public/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[email protected] 
    mailto:[email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

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