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

Re: [rss-public] rss-board feed issues

Expand Messages
  • James Holderness
    ... FYI, I did a bit of testing on RSS relative references a while back to see how various aggregators handled the situation. Of the 15 I tested, 1 failed
    Message 1 of 2 , Jan 31, 2006
      Sam Ruby wrote:
      > The second issue involves relative references in the description. The
      > RSS 2.0 spec does not specify how such references are to be resolved.
      > Common strategies include resolving relative to the feed, resolving
      > relative to rss/channel/link, or simply letting the browser take care of
      > it. Each of these strategies will fail in this case as the reference is
      > relative to the rss/channel/item/link.

      FYI, I did a bit of testing on RSS relative references a while back to see
      how various aggregators handled the situation. Of the 15 I tested, 1 failed
      completely (i.e. left the relative reference as is), 2 used the host name as
      a base, 3 (myself included) used the feed uri as the base and the remaining
      9 were evenly divided between using the channel link and the item link. And
      before anyone points out that 9 doesn't divide evenly, I should make it
      clear that one aggregator actually used both links depending on the
      situation.

      I've since changed to using the channel link since I suspect it has more
      chance of working than most. Item links seem promising at first until you
      realise that feedburner replaces all item links in a feed. Any aggregator
      that uses item links is guaranteed to fail on relative references in
      feedburner feeds.

      > At a minimum, the spec should say that the behavior of relative
      > references is undefined and should be avoided.

      Agreed.

      Regards
      James
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.