Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [rss-media] Re: limit on number of items

Expand Messages
  • Joe Plaziak
    Thank you! Actually I will be doing a different feed for use with feedreader et. al. This one is solely for the yahoo video search, which my friend is excited
    Message 1 of 7 , Feb 13, 2005
      Thank you! Actually I will be doing a different feed for use with
      feedreader et. al. This one is solely for the yahoo video search,
      which my friend is excited about.

      Regards,

      Joe


      On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 19:32:54 -0000, ecomputerd <ecomputerd@...> wrote:
      >
      > This is really not an RSS-media question. It would be better to go
      > to the videobloggers Yahoo! Group. To answer your question, I would
      > definately break it up. Some aggregators will attempt to download
      > all enclosures, and some will download just the latest one or two,
      > and some are configurable. There is no hard limit on the number of
      > items, though. In certain circumstances, that may be what you want
      > (i.e. there is only one feed URL to enter into the aggregator).
      >
      > I would probably break it up into what makes sense for the content.
      > Some possibilities might be: by genre (comedy, music, political,
      > topical, local, etc), by date created or published, (and looking at
      > your domain name) by make/model or year.
      >
      > Or you can create several different feeds with different ways "into"
      > your media:
      > Cars of the 1950's
      > Cars of the 1960's
      > Cars of the 1970's
      >
      > Then also:
      > Ford
      > Chevy
      > Foriegn
      >
      > Then also (for fun!)
      > Red Cars
      > Orange Cars
      > Yellow Cars
      > Purple Cars
      >
      > I would shoot for 10-20 items per feed. But you *could* go to 50
      > (four major groups within the 200) if you had to. I wouldn't go
      > beyond that, though, unless you really just want it for archival
      > purposes.
      >
      > I would also consider staging them, maybe one to four per week
      > (which could go on for 1 to 4 years!). If you wanted to create
      > traffic and subscribers instead of a library. It all depends on
      > exactly what you are trying to do.
      >
      > Greg Smith
      > Author, FeederReader - The Pocket PC RSS reader and podcatcher
      > Catches video, too!
      > www.FeederReader.com
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > --- In rss-media@yahoogroups.com, "tubeguy69" <tubeguy@g...> wrote:
      > >
      > > Hello,
      > >
      > > Sure glad this group even exists!
      > >
      > > I'm doing a feed
      > > (http://www.classicmusclecars.com/RSS/classic_muscle_cars.xml) for
      > a
      > > friend of mine. He has in the neighborhood of 200+ videos he wants
      > > indexed. Is there a limit on the number of <item>'s that can be in
      > the
      > > feed or should I break it up? I'm kind of new to rss, the last
      > time I
      > > did naything with it was making my own channel years ago for My
      > > Netscape.
      > >
      > > Thanks,
      > >
      > > Joe Plaziak
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
      >
      > ADVERTISEMENT
      >
      >
      > ________________________________
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      > To visit your group on the web, go to:
      > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rss-media/
      >
      > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > rss-media-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
    • Bill Kearney
      A feed, generally, is expected to contain around 15 items. The idea being it behaves like a news feed of new items. When folks have a number of them it s
      Message 2 of 7 , Feb 13, 2005
        A feed, generally, is expected to contain around 15 items. The idea being
        it behaves like a 'news feed' of new items. When folks have a number of
        them it's often common to rotate them in and out of the feed on a periodic
        basis.

        Be *very* careful about your bandwidth drain. Were you to jam all 200 of
        them into a feed and a legion of people decide to download them you may find
        some serious network problems. Using a rotated feed helps manage the
        consumption.

        What might help additionally would be to group them. Make, model, year,
        marque, genre etc. Spread them out a bit.

        When you get 'em sorted out be sure to list them on http://www.syndic8.com
        so others can find them.

        -Bill Kearney


        > I'm doing a feed
        > (http://www.classicmusclecars.com/RSS/classic_muscle_cars.xml) for a
        > friend of mine. He has in the neighborhood of 200+ videos he wants
        > indexed. Is there a limit on the number of <item>'s that can be in the
        > feed or should I break it up? I'm kind of new to rss, the last time I
        > did naything with it was making my own channel years ago for My
        > Netscape.
      • Michael Meiser
        I think what might be best is to develop RSS files for separate pages of content, NOT everything in one feed or even a rotating feed. This will avoid your
        Message 3 of 7 , Feb 13, 2005
          I think what might be best is to develop RSS files for separate pages
          of content, NOT everything in one feed or even a rotating feed. This
          will avoid your getting smashed by people enabled with podcasting
          applications, plus Yahoo crawlers will find it.

          Services like Del.icio.us and flickr have RSS feeds for every page.
          Perhaps to enable yahoo's media search most effectively on a large site
          full of video content the answer is not a blog style syndication feed
          with everything in one rotating feed, but a crawl-able site with
          permanent RSS for each page automatically generated by whatever CMS
          (content management system) you are building or may be using. It
          sounds complex if you're not a developer, or if you're not using an
          open source CMS, and this whole thing is in its infancy so it's not
          likely anything is out there right now, but I think, perhaps it'll be a
          built in feature in future CMS. It makes sense, it's efficient. You
          have separate computer readable and human readable formats.

          I thought the idea of XML and CSS was to keep human and computer
          readable formats both in the same page, even one in the same, and
          remove all the design to a CSS file. XML has helped, but RSS does
          promote another model. What's interesting is until you mentioned what
          you were trying to do, I never though about RSS in such a manner, but
          it make some sense.

          BTW, one other thing. I've done some work with the yahoo eccomerce
          solutions. Every store has the opportunity to have a complete XML feed
          of all pages and products. It's huge, but for a while google was using
          them to for froogle. It worked pretty well, but I think it was to
          easily game-able. I noticed that google ditched using the yahoo store
          XML feeds for froogle sometime last October (or there about) and
          switched completely to crawlers. I noticed this because I a couple
          clients that had problems with duplicate product listings and misquoted
          prices. Specifically google would display the highest price in a set of
          products as the base price instead of the lowest price. Once again I
          think they did this because people were trying to game froogle. They
          still have trouble with this, it seems to be an ongoing battle. I'm
          willing to bet this is at least part of the reason froogle is STILL in
          beta. http://froogle.google.com/

          I guess what I'm saying is there's a lesson to be learned here. At
          least by keeping the RSS associated with the page there's less of a
          chance of gaming, but really it comes down to verifiable sources. If
          yahoo starts indiscriminately crawling the web for RSS feeds and
          doesn't verify that the sources are legitimate then every spammer in
          the world is going to start putting RSS feeds all over the web that
          point to their content. (Keep an eye out for this in the porn industry
          they're always ahead of the curve.) This could be disastrous for
          blogging and greatly devalue the power of blogs and their RSS feeds.
          Still, with a little focus on trusted sources (i.e.. trusted domains)
          we can avoid such RSS pollution.

          I do encourage you to experiment in this direction. I think what you're
          doing is healthy. It's way to early in the game to condemn any such
          experimentation or even the direction of media-RSS. I have hope that
          these future problems may be overcome before they even start to devalue
          the power of blogs that currently very efficiently and effectively
          dominate the RSS/search domain. Or, if you prefer to look at it from
          another bias, such use of media RSS might give back some power to more
          traditional style web sites, bringing a balance between more
          traditional players and the all powerful blogosphere.

          I find this thread very interesting and I'd like to hear what other
          people think... Please add your feedback.

          On Feb 13, 2005, at 6:37 PM, Bill Kearney wrote:



          A feed, generally, is expected to contain around 15 items. The idea
          being
          it behaves like a 'news feed' of new items. When folks have a number of
          them it's often common to rotate them in and out of the feed on a
          periodic
          basis.

          Be *very* careful about your bandwidth drain. Were you to jam all 200
          of
          them into a feed and a legion of people decide to download them you may
          find
          some serious network problems. Using a rotated feed helps manage the
          consumption.

          What might help additionally would be to group them. Make, model, year,
          marque, genre etc. Spread them out a bit.

          When you get 'em sorted out be sure to list them on
          http://www.syndic8.com
          so others can find them.

          -Bill Kearney


          > I'm doing a feed
          > (http://www.classicmusclecars.com/RSS/classic_muscle_cars.xml) for a
          > friend of mine. He has in the neighborhood of 200+ videos he wants
          > indexed. Is there a limit on the number of <item>'s that can be in the
          > feed or should I break it up? I'm kind of new to rss, the last time I
          > did naything with it was making my own channel years ago for My
          > Netscape.




          Yahoo! Groups Links
        • Bill Kearney
          ... I ll respectfully disagree; completely. A feed isn t expected, by most folks consuming RSS, to be an index document. It s expected to behave like a feed of
          Message 4 of 7 , Feb 14, 2005
            > I think what might be best is to develop RSS files for separate pages
            > of content, NOT everything in one feed or even a rotating feed. This
            > will avoid your getting smashed by people enabled with podcasting
            > applications, plus Yahoo crawlers will find it.

            I'll respectfully disagree; completely.

            A feed isn't expected, by most folks consuming RSS, to be an index document.
            It's expected to behave like a feed of news-like items. While it's always
            been "possible" to use it as an index format that's not the dominant form
            seen today.

            My partner and I run Syndic8 and can speak with a fair degree of certainty
            about this.

            Bear in mind that a reader program is going to request downloading the page
            over and over again on a scheduled interval. Having one per page for data
            that /doesn't change/ and doesn't even remotely resemble a 'news-feed'
            doesn't seem like a very wise idea. Some services have enough activity that
            they can get away with making per-page feeds. Delicious is one, flickr not
            quite but close enough.

            Sites themselves are crawled. Feeds are not spider-fodder. They CAN be
            used as such but that's not their intent. And most search sites continue to
            use the HTML pages as their main source (as they should continue to do).

            > I thought the idea of XML and CSS was to keep human and computer
            > readable formats both in the same page, even one in the same, and
            > remove all the design to a CSS file. XML has helped, but RSS does
            > promote another model. What's interesting is until you mentioned what
            > you were trying to do, I never though about RSS in such a manner, but
            > it make some sense.

            Not really. It *can* be used this way but that's not it's expected use.

            > I guess what I'm saying is there's a lesson to be learned here. At
            > least by keeping the RSS associated with the page there's less of a
            > chance of gaming, but really it comes down to verifiable sources. If
            > yahoo starts indiscriminately crawling the web for RSS feeds and
            > doesn't verify that the sources are legitimate then every spammer in
            > the world is going to start putting RSS feeds all over the web that
            > point to their content.

            That's already happened. As long as their are systems the nitwits will
            spend all their time trying to game them. Whether it's RSS, atom, RDF or
            whatever there's no reason to expect that these jerks won't spend time
            trying to ruin it.

            > (Keep an eye out for this in the porn industry
            > they're always ahead of the curve.) This could be disastrous for
            > blogging and greatly devalue the power of blogs and their RSS feeds.
            > Still, with a little focus on trusted sources (i.e.. trusted domains)
            > we can avoid such RSS pollution.

            I again disagree. The power of feeds is in their ability to be subscribed
            by the user with no commitment. If a feed is bogus it'll simply be dropped
            or, most likely, never subscribed to in the first place. There's no
            "destruction" of anything at risk here other than wasted bandwidth. If
            folks want to make crappy content (spam) they're more than free to do so.
            The readers will vote with their subscriptions.

            -Bill Kearney
          • daviddhall@yahoo.com
            I thought Bill s comments were interesting in the fact that I agree with what he is saying, I just wish that wasn t the case. From the search perspective, I d
            Message 5 of 7 , Feb 16, 2005
              I thought Bill's comments were interesting in the fact that I agree
              with what he is saying, I just wish that wasn't the case. From the
              search perspective, I'd love to be able to grab a single feed of your
              content (RSS in this case) and know exactly what all your site
              currently publishes. If you've removed media, we'd know because it'd
              no longer be in your RSS feed. If you've updated media, we'd know
              because the RSS item (or media:content) would change. Etc...

              While search engines are supposed to crawl sites to figure out what
              media a site is hosting, they could do an even better job just being
              explicitly told everything. Leaving things up to the miracles of
              parsing a web page, it's not the best method to truly discover what a
              page is talking about, summary of the information, etc. From the
              audio/video perspective, we don't find a lot of the content on the
              web because it's hidden behind javascript, or any other list of
              reasons.

              So... yes, I'd like to see it be used as "search fodder". I'd like it
              to be a index of your site. Whether or not that goes against the
              general notion of RSS, or it's reason for adoption, it doesn't really
              matter that much to me.

              I don't want to drop this topic entirely as I'm positive I'll want to
              dig on this more later. I'm just going to hold off a bit since
              there's more important things to solve.

              --- In rss-media@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Kearney" <ml_yahoo@i...>
              wrote:
              > > I think what might be best is to develop RSS files for separate
              pages
              > > of content, NOT everything in one feed or even a rotating feed.
              This
              > > will avoid your getting smashed by people enabled with podcasting
              > > applications, plus Yahoo crawlers will find it.
              >
              > I'll respectfully disagree; completely.
              >
              > A feed isn't expected, by most folks consuming RSS, to be an index
              document.
              > It's expected to behave like a feed of news-like items. While it's
              always
              > been "possible" to use it as an index format that's not the
              dominant form
              > seen today.
              >
              > My partner and I run Syndic8 and can speak with a fair degree of
              certainty
              > about this.
              >
              > Bear in mind that a reader program is going to request downloading
              the page
              > over and over again on a scheduled interval. Having one per page
              for data
              > that /doesn't change/ and doesn't even remotely resemble a 'news-
              feed'
              > doesn't seem like a very wise idea. Some services have enough
              activity that
              > they can get away with making per-page feeds. Delicious is one,
              flickr not
              > quite but close enough.
              >
              > Sites themselves are crawled. Feeds are not spider-fodder. They
              CAN be
              > used as such but that's not their intent. And most search sites
              continue to
              > use the HTML pages as their main source (as they should continue to
              do).
              >
              > > I thought the idea of XML and CSS was to keep human and computer
              > > readable formats both in the same page, even one in the same, and
              > > remove all the design to a CSS file. XML has helped, but RSS does
              > > promote another model. What's interesting is until you mentioned
              what
              > > you were trying to do, I never though about RSS in such a manner,
              but
              > > it make some sense.
              >
              > Not really. It *can* be used this way but that's not it's expected
              use.
              >
              > > I guess what I'm saying is there's a lesson to be learned here. At
              > > least by keeping the RSS associated with the page there's less of
              a
              > > chance of gaming, but really it comes down to verifiable
              sources. If
              > > yahoo starts indiscriminately crawling the web for RSS feeds and
              > > doesn't verify that the sources are legitimate then every spammer
              in
              > > the world is going to start putting RSS feeds all over the web
              that
              > > point to their content.
              >
              > That's already happened. As long as their are systems the nitwits
              will
              > spend all their time trying to game them. Whether it's RSS, atom,
              RDF or
              > whatever there's no reason to expect that these jerks won't spend
              time
              > trying to ruin it.
              >
              > > (Keep an eye out for this in the porn industry
              > > they're always ahead of the curve.) This could be disastrous for
              > > blogging and greatly devalue the power of blogs and their RSS
              feeds.
              > > Still, with a little focus on trusted sources (i.e.. trusted
              domains)
              > > we can avoid such RSS pollution.
              >
              > I again disagree. The power of feeds is in their ability to be
              subscribed
              > by the user with no commitment. If a feed is bogus it'll simply be
              dropped
              > or, most likely, never subscribed to in the first place. There's no
              > "destruction" of anything at risk here other than wasted
              bandwidth. If
              > folks want to make crappy content (spam) they're more than free to
              do so.
              > The readers will vote with their subscriptions.
              >
              > -Bill Kearney
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.