Bob Wyman wrote:
Some sites are beginning to serve their feeds via intermediaries like
FeedBurner. They are doing this, in part, to make it easier for them to get
better statistics on their use of the feeds, to off-load bandwidth
requirements, or to take advantage of the advertising insertion and
On Monday, May 9, 2005, at 10:27 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote:
Bob Wyman wrote:
Some sites are beginning to serve their feeds via intermediaries like
FeedBurner. They are doing this, in part, to make it easier for them
to get
better statistics on their use of the feeds, to off-load bandwidth
Antone Roundy wrote:
302 would result in feed readers (that follow the HTTP spec) continuing
to hit the publisher's site every time they checked the feed, and then
going to FeedBurner.
As it would not be a very large hit of say, 25 to 50 KiB; I guess people
can live with that.
2) Not everyone
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
Sites could also use a HTTP 302 link on their own site that points
to FeedBurner in the end. When FeedBurner dies or when they no longer
have desire to use the service, they switch the location of the
temporary redirect and all is fine.
While 302 is an
On Mon, May 09, 2005 at 10:53:14AM -0600, Antone Roundy wrote:
302 would result in feed readers (that follow the HTTP spec) continuing
to hit the publisher's site every time they checked the feed, and then
going to FeedBurner.
I'm not sure how user agents would handle it, but one could
