and publisher definable. Sorry, what I said, was in fact, not inclusive of your point regarding publisher control. There are plenty of feed readers that offer this level of control. For example, IE 6, Fx, Opera, and Safari -- yes, they are browsers , and yes this is stretching things... but not really, when you consider how many feed readers use a browser interface to their system. If a browser can not be seen as a feed reader, unless it were programmed as such, then all of these service providers must also be excluded from the feed reader list.
On 3/9/06, M. David Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
""this is a feed intended for rendering in an aggregator" and
"Publishers' don't have control over the look of their feed in" other
readers."
WHAT??? Are you kidding me... If by other readers you are choosing
to exclude those that do, then thats just lame....
Take for example, your own Dare Obasanjo's RSS Bandit (See attached
screen shot) or, hitting even closer to home, Windows Live and
Start.com, which both allow the ability to build gadgets than can
render data feeds however you might see fit. There are TONS of
examples of feed readers that provide AMPLE capability for user
definable rendering of a web feed. I hope these two are enough, but
if you, in fact, would like to see more, I would be happy to write
provide just such a report for you.
On 3/8/06, James Yenne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> IE6 and FF render Atom/RSS feeds as html using the xml-stylesheet directive,
> however, IE7 Beta 2 drops the feed's xml-stylesheet directive, if one
> exists, and replacing with IE7's own stylesheet containing the gray to blue
> gradient background with the MS RSS extensions for navigation/collation.
> This rendering is all pre subscribe, so the feed has not been converted to
> RSS yet. I had an email conversation last week with Sean Lyndersay about
> this, and his take is that "this is a feed intended for rendering in an
> aggregator" and "Publishers' don't have control over the look of their feed
> in" other readers.
>
> My counterpoint is that this is non-standard approach because the
> xml-stylesheet directive is a standard XML directive, and IE7 (the reader,
> not the browser) is essentially saying that RSS/Atom are not first of all
> XML and should be handled in some proprietary way through IE's
> display/navigation layer. Feeds that use the xml-stylesheet to provide
> custom navigation are now in IE7 required to use the IE7 navigation xsl,
> which is not standard. The solution, I believe, is that the IE7 proprietary
> rendering (and xml-stylesheet removal) be the default ONLY when none is
> provided, which is probably most cases.
>
> I would call IE7 dropping xml-stylesheet directives a data lose issue. So
> my question is, what is the right thing for the browser to do? When is a
> browser a feed reader, and thus (I guess) simply can drop elements from the
> feed at will? Can a browser just drop xml-stylesheet directives at will?
>
> Thanks,
> James
>
--
<M:D/>
M. David Peterson
http://www.xsltblog.com/
--
<M:D/>
M. David Peterson
http://www.xsltblog.com/
