 | | Re: Attention all RSS geeks! —Dan Boger
|
| | | (...) I've become convinced that Atom might be a better solution. If only because it has better mechanisms to ensure that entries are identified uniquely, and support for meta information about authors, etc. (...) If we're using RSS, using a custom (...) (20 years ago, 23-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish, lugnet.general, lugnet.fun.community, lugnet.off-topic.geek, lugnet.org)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Attention all RSS geeks! —Kelly McKiernan
|
| | | | | (...) I've just looked over some of the Atom docs, but it seems very similar to RSS to me, only much newer. Is Atom supported by many current blog or web publishing software? My thoughts were that straight RSS feeds would work within the LENNI (...) (20 years ago, 23-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Attention all RSS geeks! —Dan Boger
|
| | | | | | (...) AFAIK, yes - most CMSs, and almost all aggregators do support atom. (...) I don't think there's much of a difference between emitting Atom or RSS/LENNI, but I don't have that strong a preference. If everyone else is dead against Atom, I'll go (...) (20 years ago, 23-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Attention all RSS geeks! —Jake McKee
|
| | | | | | (...) I think you're right, at least in theory, that Atom is the better standard, simply because it's being designed from day one to be what it is meant to be. (Whereas the RSS format has sorta bounced around from concept to concept, then was (...) (20 years ago, 23-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Attention all RSS geeks! —Kelly McKiernan
|
| | | | | | | (...) Same here. Good point about spec changes, Jake. I'd love to do a pro/con list of RSS/Atom, but I don't know enough yet, so I guess I'll have to research that some more. My main concern is using something that can be used by the maximum number (...) (20 years ago, 23-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Attention all RSS geeks! —Dan Boger
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Heh, the biggest political fight of recent techies. Used to be XML, but that has settled down considerably. I used to follow the fight, but got really tired of it... I did come the conclusion that Mark Pilgrim (of the Atom side) knows what (...) (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Attention all RSS geeks! —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | In lugnet.publish, Dan Boger wrote: (a lot of very informative stuff that made my head spin a bit, although I now think I know which Dan favors which does carry some weight with me, Dan's often right, technically... ) So what's the net here? Does (...) (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Attention all RSS geeks! —Kelly McKiernan
|
| | | | | | | | (...) That there are two methods on which we could base LENNI, and it's fairly apparent to me that one needs to be chosen over the other. Dual development is a hindrance in the long run. (...) Not this minute, but definitely soon. I think the next (...) (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Attention all RSS geeks! —Dan Boger
|
| | | | | | (...) Well, as long as the content you're feeding it is pure ascii. For instance, getting LUGNET posts to be valid RSS was not as easy as I thought it would be. Making one for 1000stein would be even harder. Dealing with charsets, embedded images (...) (20 years ago, 23-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Attention all RSS geeks! —René Hoffmeister
|
| | | | | | (...) As for charsets, AFAIK ISO-8859-1 covers 17 languages, including English, German, Dutch and French. Nevertheless, every news publisher should try to keep his data within this charset when working with LENNI. I.e. I have to be aware of some (...) (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Attention all RSS geeks! —Dan Boger
|
| | | | | | (...) I'd say just follow the spec (either RSS or Atom) as far as specifying in the feed what the charset is. (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | RSS vs. Atom (was: Attention All RSS Geeks) —Kelly McKiernan
|
| | | | Time to break this into a subthread, I think... RSS v. Atom - Pro and Con Time So now that I've spent the last few hours reading the (URL) history>[1] of RSS v2.0 and what's become Atom (although the Homer Simpson in me liked its previous name, (...) (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: RSS vs. Atom (was: Attention All RSS Geeks) —René Hoffmeister
|
| | | | Hi Kelly, (...) As said earlier by mail, I think that this is the most important thing to have implemented in a "LEGO community related" newssystem. Since I got no replies after I mentioned it in the globalAFOL group, I thought the participated (...) (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: RSS vs. Atom (was: Attention All RSS Geeks) —Kelly McKiernan
|
| | | | (...) Sorry about that, got distracted! Mostly BrickFest, some other things. Back on it again, and your email from 1 August was very helpful in setting the direction for LENNI. (...) I think both Atom and RSS as a base would allow us to do this. (...) (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: RSS vs. Atom (was: Attention All RSS Geeks) —Dan Boger
|
| | | | | (...) Adding tags to the spec isn't "expensive" - and since clients won't be required to implement support for new tags, unless they want to, I say, let's think of anything we can want, and then decide if it's worth adding to the spec or not. :) (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: RSS vs. Atom (was: Attention All RSS Geeks) —Kelly McKiernan
|
| | | | | | (...) Yeah, good point - I had my software developer hat on (lazy boy Kelly) and not the Visionary On The Mount hat ("all that and a side of fries!") you need for setting up something like this... BTW, I'd like to make sure appropriate people are (...) (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: RSS vs. Atom (was: Attention All RSS Geeks) —Kelly McKiernan
|
| | | | | (...) Oh! Oh! How about Content Type (not CDATA): News Blog MOC Announcement (or is this redundant with news or MOC?) Calendar Item ... what else? Probably need a better label than "Content Type" since that terminology is already used technically (...) (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish, FTX)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: RSS vs. Atom (was: Attention All RSS Geeks) —Dan Boger
|
| | | | | | | (...) * Administrative (both LENNI and content providers) * Market-ish (as Larry mentioned) * Poll? (...) How about "Category"? (...) Yah, should be able to allow that. An item can be of multiple themes... Can it be of multiple categories? (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: RSS vs. Atom (was: Attention All RSS Geeks) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) For Sale (so that people can filter it out!) or some more generic marketish tag (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish, FTX)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: RSS vs. Atom (was: Attention All RSS Geeks) —René Hoffmeister
|
| | | | (...) You really shouldn't have to apologize. I didn't meant it this way. I just thought the topic is of no interest, without any subjective assessment. But so much the better that you carry on with LENNI, I'm really glad about it. Unfortunalety, (...) (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: RSS vs. Atom (was: Attention All RSS Geeks) —Kelly McKiernan
|
| | | | (...) Ha! You do better than many native-English speakers I deal with daily. (...) That's a good question. I do think most feeds will end up being served from a centralized server, but that's not an absolute necessity. RSS links can be distributed, (...) (20 years ago, 24-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: RSS vs. Atom (was: Attention All RSS Geeks) —Dan Boger
|
| | | | (...) Why have a centralized server? I'd expect there be a list of feeds someplace, and maybe mirroring of feeds... But it would make a lot of sense to have each feed hosted off the service that generates it. Unless LENNI wants to support remote (...) (20 years ago, 25-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: RSS vs. Atom (was: Attention All RSS Geeks) —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | (...) I saw a centralised server as an aggregator, not the primary source of the original content. I think there's a desire to be able to aggregate feeds from many places and present them blended together. Once aggregated, some specific filtering (...) (20 years ago, 25-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: RSS vs. Atom (was: Attention All RSS Geeks) —Kelly McKiernan
|
| | | | | | (...) That's pretty much what I'm thinking too... provide tools for anybody to publish LENNI-enhanced feeds from their own sources, and provide other tools for readers, either web-based or desktop/compiled. And as a side benefit, I also see the (...) (20 years ago, 26-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: RSS vs. Atom (was: Attention All RSS Geeks) —René Hoffmeister
|
| | | | (...) Hm. I guess there is a misunderstanding somewhere (and I think it's caused by language barriers, sorry, I simply don't know how to translate individual technical descriptions). But I'll try one more time. It would be ridiculous if we couldn't (...) (20 years ago, 26-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: RSS vs. Atom (was: Attention All RSS Geeks) —Kelly McKiernan
|
| | | | (...) [SNIP] (...) I agree, one centralized area would be an excellent resource, one which LENNI could accomplish easily, I believe. That's a big part of why I think something like this should be created. Let me expand my assumptions on the project (...) (20 years ago, 29-Aug-04, to lugnet.publish)
|
| | | | |
