- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 11:15:13 -0500
- To: www-validator@w3.org
On 1/23/17 10:05 AM, Michael[tm] Smith wrote:
> "Johnston, William" <wjohnston@mpr.org>, 2017-01-20 19:28 +0000:
>> Archived-At: <http://www.w3.org/mid/804759A3-1D55-4201-A496-8F4747CE1153@contoso.com>
>>
>> I’ve been working on modifying some RSS feeds per recent https
>> requirements from iTunes and elsewhere. In doing so, I’ve noticed that
>> the requirement from the RSS 2.0 specification that the “the url must be
>> an http url” is being interpreted to exclude https.
>
> If so yeah that seems bad.
>
>> I would assume that https is a superset of http and thus included in this
>> definition.
>
> Yeah
>
>> http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification#ltenclosuregtSubelementOfLtitemgt
>>
>> Assuming that this is a correct interpretation, what would be involved in
>> fixing the validator to allow https urls in enclosures?
>
> Have not tested but I think it would require changing this regexp:
>
> https://github.com/rubys/feedvalidator/blob/master/src/feedvalidator/validators.py#L903
>
> http_re = re.compile("http://" + addr_spec.domain_re + '(?::\d+)?' + '(/|$)', re.IGNORECASE)
>
> Specifically, I guess the “http://” part of that would need to be changed
> to “http[s]?://” or whatever the most efficient way to express it is.
>
>> For reference, iTunes is going to require the enclosure URLs to be https
>> before long, meaning that all iTunes Store compatible URLs will not
>> validate: https://itunespartner.apple.com/en/podcasts/faq#76672088
>
> Yeah I’m sure that kind of change is going to be happening more and more.
>
> So I suggest raising a PR at https://github.com/rubys/feedvalidator/pulls
> with a patch for the regexp tweak described above. Or else just raising an
> issue at https://github.com/rubys/feedvalidator/issues
>
> I notice there are a number of open issues and PRs there, but it looks like
> somebody has been actively committing to the sources as recently as September
> of last year https://github.com/rubys/feedvalidator/commits/master
>
> Anyway, if you can get a fix for this merged there soon, I’ll make sure it
> gets added to the W3C service.
Related reading:
https://github.com/rubys/feedvalidator/pull/12
https://github.com/rubys/feedvalidator/pull/16
https://github.com/rubys/feedvalidator/pull/17
https://github.com/rubys/feedvalidator/pull/30
TL;DR: indeed a number of authors disagree with the spec writer on this
topic. If either the spec were updated, or those authors got together
and produced a different spec, the feedvalidator would be updated.
> —Mike
- Sam Ruby
Received on Monday, 23 January 2017 16:15:47 UTC