RSS Draft 1.09 Change Notes
- RSS Draft 1.09 Change Notes
A new draft of the proposed spec is online.
1. In the Copyright section, the phrase "older drafts" becomes "other
2. In the Introduction, the sample files have been updated to use a
version attribute of "2.0.2". Also, a sentence and link have been
added to reflect the board's decision to support the Feed Validator:
"RSS documents can be tested for validity in the Feed Validator."
3. Spec rules and namespaced elements
A sentence has been added to the Introduction: "None of the
restrictions described in this specification apply to elements defined
in a namespace."
One of the difficulties we've run into during the past several weeks
on RSS-Public is drafting language in the spec that doesn't overstep
RSS 2.0.1-rv-6 and tell namespaces what to do. This occurs most
commonly when discussing restrictions on an element's child elements.
The rule in RSS for namespaces has been simple: "A RSS feed may
contain elements not described on this page, only if those elements
are defined in a namespace." However, some namespaces do something
unusual -- they contain children that are not themselves defined in a
The added sentence puts a wall between the core set of RSS elements
and the namespaced elements that may be present in a document. The
rules of the spec apply to the core but make no restriction on what
takes place within defined namespaced elements, which appears to be
the intent of existing specs since namespace support was added in RSS 2.0.
4. Maximum image height and width
The channel-image section deletes the sentence "This image must be no
larger than 144 pixels wide and 400 pixels tall." and adds this
proscription to the channel-image-width and channel-image-height sections.
In width, the sentence "The image MUST be no wider than 144 pixels."
In height, the sentence "The image MUST be no taller than 400 pixels."
5. Two to-do items have been added
* Should a supplementary appendix be added that covers the most
commonly used namespaced elements?
* Adding documentation on how to create RFC 822-plus-four-year
- rcade wrote:
>Shouldn't that section link to http://www.rssboard.org/feed-validator ?
> 2. In the Introduction, the sample files have been updated to use a
> version attribute of "2.0.2". Also, a sentence and link have been
> added to reflect the board's decision to support the Feed Validator:
> "RSS documents can be tested for validity in the Feed Validator."
If you have (or can install) Python 2.4 on your server, you can also
host an instance of the Feed Validator there. My preference, if you opt
to go this path, is that the instance be kept up to date. This can be
done via a simple cron job that does nothing more than a "cvs -q update
- Sam Ruby