Sam Ruby wrote:
> There is a growing trend to return description back to what some believe
> as it's original meaning... an up to 500 character description of an
> item, often an excerpt with HTML markup removed. Whether this is
> something you care to produce or not, you will certainly encounter feeds
> that look this way.
> Many of these feeds will also contain the full text of the item in a
> content:encoded element, either XML encoded or as CDATA.
> Given this reality, which should Radio display? It is possible to
> display both, but in most cases that will simply look odd. Perhaps a
> concrete example would help:
> Since Aggie, like radio's aggregator, is capable of displaying HTML, it
> selects the content:encoded element if it is available, and then the
> description element if it is not. This generally produces the best
> results for the largest number of feeds.
Would it be possible & practical to have a per-feed choice? Where
content:encoded really shines is with someone who tends to long posts: some
people will want to read every word, every time, but some would rather only
see an abstract, and decide whether or not to read the whole thing from