Blog posts tagged "rss2.0"

Definitive RSS 2.0 feed?

April 8th, 2004

I’ve probably alienated any RSS 2.0 fans who might have once read this site (see train wreck), but my question from January still persists, can someone, anyone, point me at a feed, or set feeds the parsing of which would demonstrate at least marginal RSS 2.0 competence?

Dave’s feed is missing the T and L of the core RSS TLD tripod. Sam’s feed gets a bit esoteric, while a Moveable Type RSS 2.0 feed might be considered politically suspect.

Ditto, does anbody still publish an 0.90 feed?

Anybody got an example feed I can test against? Help!?

Tagged: Uncategorized , ,

Patient: Dr., It Hurts When I Move My Arm!

January 25th, 2004

Since I had open and was hacking on it, I briefly thought about enhancing Magpie’s RSS 2.0 support. What a train wreck. It was about the time I noticed that at least one high profile feed didn’t have link elements, and another was embedding arbitrary XHTML tags using inline namespaces (which I’ll grant is conceptually cool, if I wasn’t in the middle of writing a parser) that I decided that this is not what I want to be doing.

Magpie is and will remain happy to parse any XML document you say is RSS, but is unlikely to know what to do with one that lacks titles, or links. Also I would be happy to accept a patch to handle Userland RSS date parsing, but I doubt if I’ll get to it anytime soon. Again, I point people to Aaron’s XSL wizardry which seems to be able, among other things, to turn Userland RSS dates into the format that Magpie can parse. (to which the doctor says, “So don’t move your arm”)

Tagged: Uncategorized , ,

Still Unclear on the Concept

July 18th, 2003

The ownership of Userland’s RSS 2.0 has been transfered to Dave’s new employer the Berkman Center. An advisory board of 3 people has been announced, Jon Udell, Brent Simmons, and of course Dave Winer.

Looks more like 3 card monte then meaningful progress.

Tagged: Uncategorized , , ,

It All Makes Sense Now

June 27th, 2003

After reading this thread discussing Dave’s “clarificaton” of the <link> element, I think I finally figured out why RSS has always seemed straightforward and clear to me, but so confusing, and difficult to others.

I Believe in History

You see my history with RSS goes directly from the straightforward, and simple RSS 0.9 to the well thought out, and refactored RSS 1.0, just skipping the murkiness in between. What becomes clear reading the above thread is what I’ve always felt at a gut level, the RSS 0.9x series is a kludge, an unacknowledge attempt to hijack one format (with high visibility) to serve the intentions of another. Its sort of a reversal on the old “when all you have is a hammer” saying, reformulated as “if you tell people really loudly, over and over that you pound nails with a saw, people will eventually believe you”. (and cut their hand in the process).


I knew things were dire at a times, but it never occured to me that their could be so much confusion about the basic RSS data model, and core elements. (this perspective again comes from using primarily RSS 1.0 which made as one of its cheif design criteria backwards compatibility with RSS 0.9, therefore never having cut itself loose to drift in ambiguity the same way)

Message is the Medium?

A more constructive way to characterize the confusion is whether RSS is a syndication format (the RSS 0.9 and RSS 1.0 data model) that is providing information about an external resource (and there for all <link> elements are conceptually contained by the <channel> element they are nested in [thats what nesting means folks!]), or is it a publishing medium, a really ugly, but semantically rich weblog in its own right (which is the argued for meaning of link in RSS 2.0, that necessitated adding the guid element).

ps. I promise something more interesting soon, really. Or at least more interesting to me

pps. if people are really have trouble extracting links from their weblog posts, contact me, and I’ll send you code to do is

Tagged: Uncategorized , , ,

I Don’t Get It

June 14th, 2003

Why do people keep listening to this man? Sam wants to know why Dave said MT’s RSS support “was funky”. Its obvious why, because Dave sees Moveable Type as a competitor, how deep do we need to look?

A man who claimed to invent RSS but doesn’t even understand the basic technologies or standards involved. He querulously wants to know what version of RSS MT supports, because he can’t conceive of someone supporting multiple formats transparently. He makes wildly uninformed statements like “they produce RDF where RSS is called for”, um Dave, that is called X-M-L. He follows that up with snide comments implying it is somehow Ben & Mena’s fault for RSS development being stalled, when an even cursory scan of the history of RSS will show that MT is largely a latecomer to RSS development, and very neutral, and that real problem lies somewhere else. (today stopped implying it and came out and said it, proving either he has no scruples in his FUD campaign or his memory is really starting to go [nice picasso though])

People are “chickenshit” for not kowtowing to his lousy design sense, Microsoft’s embrace and extend is something we should aspire to in our standards, and his critics are beating up on an old man on one the 1yr anniversary of his heart attack becausle we all secretly want him dead. An old man who can take the time to insult a product that apparently he can’t even install, despite the fact that immense amounts of work were obviously but into making MT’s installation brain dead simple. (before they gave it away for free)

Dave is as welcome to his opinions as the next crazy old man you pass on the street, and if you reject the idea that his entire public persona is just the napalm equipped marketting campaign of a rentless, unscrupulous competitor then crazy is the only sense it makes. So why do people keep treating him like some 800lb gorilla? Well, I’ll admit he certainly has got something special, I can’t think of any stranger who frustrates me nearly as much on such a regular basis.

Aaron asks Dave to explain 2 statements made on his website, Dave responds with a vicious attack.

Tim Bray seems to me to bend over backwards to be fair and flattering, but Dave feels this is trashing his reputation. I guess you could make the arguement that someone saying you “want to do the right thing”, and comparing you to a genius is trashing your reputation, but are you sure you want to draw attention to that reputation?

Ben writes a technical, and neutrally worded statement on why Echo might be a good idea. Dave responds with a ridiculous and very personal retort.

Tagged: Uncategorized , , ,

RSS 2.0, Does Anybody Want It?

December 20th, 2002

There has been an assumption that we need to include support for RSS 2.0 in the next version of XML::RSS, but so far I haven’t seen much demand for it. Eric asked for it today, but a quick search of comp.lang.perl.*, PerlMonks, etc, turns up very little that looks like that itch needs to be scratched. And certainly nothing has made it into the official wishlist.

Eric pointed me to a potential RSS 2.0 patch for XML::RSS.

And while I’m waiting for someone to write the CVS to blog tool, I’ve setup a cron job to maintain an updated daily XML::RSS ChangeLog. (update: better yet a XML::RSS changelog as RSS)

Tagged: Uncategorized , ,