Comments on: 7 Poor Features Of RSS http://solitude.vkps.co.uk/Archives/2004/01/25/7PoorFeaturesOfRSS/ Technology. Code. Living relentlessly in the real world. Sun, 18 Jul 2010 14:29:15 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Gary Fleming http://solitude.vkps.co.uk/Archives/2004/01/25/7PoorFeaturesOfRSS/comment-page-1/#comment-371 Gary Fleming Mon, 26 Jan 2004 09:07:13 +0000 <p>I'm not sure that he means downloading the full archive every day, but even a full permalink page is a bit much. Syndicating the text is what <acronym title="Rich Site Summary">RSS</acronym> is really about.</p><p>Also, the choice of what to send (text, html etc) should be up to the producer, not the consumer.</p><p>Atom does go a long way to cleaning most of this stuff up.</p> I’m not sure that he means downloading the full archive every day, but even a full permalink page is a bit much. Syndicating the text is what RSS is really about.

Also, the choice of what to send (text, html etc) should be up to the producer, not the consumer.

Atom does go a long way to cleaning most of this stuff up.

]]> By: Deraj http://solitude.vkps.co.uk/Archives/2004/01/25/7PoorFeaturesOfRSS/comment-page-1/#comment-372 Deraj Mon, 26 Jan 2004 02:33:22 +0000 <p>I read his article and his ideas seem pretty crazy to me (bordering on contrary to the principles of the Web and the established <acronym title="Rich Site Summary">RSS</acronym>/blog culture).</p><p>I'm not even sure that #3 is realistic. It would seem to me that putting an entire <acronym title="HyperText Markup Language">HTML</acronym> page into an RSS feed would be a waste (instead of downloading one page, you download the entire news archive... every day!?). The other options seem like they're practically the same thing just with more or less text (and authors seem to be pretty spread out on this issue).</p><p>Perhaps links within all the feeds to the other feeds would help the user to find the type of feed they want when a site supports multiple feed types. But this seems like a waste of bandwidth to me (the RSS file that is downloaded constantly should be as small as reasonably possible in my opinion).</p> I read his article and his ideas seem pretty crazy to me (bordering on contrary to the principles of the Web and the established RSS/blog culture).

I’m not even sure that #3 is realistic. It would seem to me that putting an entire HTML page into an RSS feed would be a waste (instead of downloading one page, you download the entire news archive… every day!?). The other options seem like they’re practically the same thing just with more or less text (and authors seem to be pretty spread out on this issue).

Perhaps links within all the feeds to the other feeds would help the user to find the type of feed they want when a site supports multiple feed types. But this seems like a waste of bandwidth to me (the RSS file that is downloaded constantly should be as small as reasonably possible in my opinion).

]]>