W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > May 2009

[whatwg] Removing the need for separate feeds

From: Adrian Sutton <adrian.sutton@ephox.com>
Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 11:45:17 +0100
Message-ID: <C63C40CD.12831%adrian.sutton@ephox.com>
On 22/05/2009 11:36, "Toby Inkster" <mail at tobyinkster.co.uk> wrote:
> Surely this proves the need for a way of extracting feeds from HTML?
> 
> You never see manually written feeds because people can't be bothered to
> manually write feeds. So the people who manually author HTML simply
> don't bother providing feeds at all.
> 
> If an HTML page can *be* a feed, this allows manually authored HTML
> pages to be subscribed to in feed readers.

For this to make sense, these people would also be manually adding new
entries to the top of the page and dropping old ones off the bottom all by
hand.  Feeds aren't used for checking for updates to a page - they're used
to check for updates for a site (or section of a site). There are very few
cases where every item in a feed corresponds to the same page, even where
the entries may be aggregated into a single index page.

Even people who really want to edit pages in plain text editors tend to use
a system like Bloxsom to build those into an overall site, and generate the
feeds.

Can anyone point to examples where the content is entirely hand crafted and
a feed would actually make sense?

Regards,

Adrian Sutton.
______________________
Adrian Sutton, CTO
UK: +44 1 753 27 2229  US: +1 (650) 292 9659 x717
Ephox <http://www.ephox.com/>
Ephox Blogs <http://planet.ephox.com/>, Personal Blog
<http://www.symphonious.net/>
Received on Friday, 22 May 2009 03:45:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:08:49 UTC