Known FeedDemon issue?
http://www.oreillynet.com/xml/blog/2006/04/update_hello_saxon_on_net_an_a.html#comment-25653 Steven, according to the feed validator, the Atom 1.0 feed for the XML blog validates, so I'm assuming there is a bug in FeedDemon. Please report this problem to the FeedDemon developers. Justin Watt | April 20, 2006 11:24 AM which is in response to: Are you aware that those of us who read your blog in an aggregator such as FeedDemon see all the HTML markup? Makes it very hard to read, and hard to judge whether a particular post is worth leaving the aggregator for a closer look. Steven Black | April 14, 2006 09:10 AM before I post a bug to FeedDemon for something they are already aware of, does anybody know if they are? -- M:D/ M. David Peterson http://www.xsltblog.com/
Re: Known FeedDemon issue?
No idea if they're already aware. I'd go ahead and report it. M. David Peterson wrote: http://www.oreillynet.com/xml/blog/2006/04/update_hello_saxon_on_net_an_a.html#comment-25653 Steven, according to the feed validator, the Atom 1.0 feed for the XML blog validates, so I'm assuming there is a bug in FeedDemon. Please report this problem to the FeedDemon developers. Justin Watt | April 20, 2006 11:24 AM which is in response to: Are you aware that those of us who read your blog in an aggregator such as FeedDemon see all the HTML markup? Makes it very hard to read, and hard to judge whether a particular post is worth leaving the aggregator for a closer look. Steven Black | April 14, 2006 09:10 AM before I post a bug to FeedDemon for something they are already aware of, does anybody know if they are? -- M:D/ M. David Peterson http://www.xsltblog.com/
Re: Known FeedDemon issue?
M. David Peterson wrote: Are you aware that those of us who read your blog in an aggregator such as FeedDemon see all the HTML markup? Makes it very hard to read, and hard to judge whether a particular post is worth leaving the aggregator for a closer look. Steven Black | April 14, 2006 09:10 AM before I post a bug to FeedDemon for something they are already aware of, does anybody know if they are? I've just tested with an oldish beta of FeedDemon 2.0 and it looked good to me. It's possible he's using a really ancient version that doesn't have Atom 1.0 support. That might result in the content being interpreted as plaintext. Regards James
Re: Known FeedDemon issue?
Cool! Thanks James :) On 4/20/06, James M Snell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No idea if they're already aware. I'd go ahead and report it. M. David Peterson wrote: http://www.oreillynet.com/xml/blog/2006/04/update_hello_saxon_on_net_an_a.html#comment-25653 Steven, according to the feed validator, the Atom 1.0 feed for the XML blog validates, so I'm assuming there is a bug in FeedDemon. Please report this problem to the FeedDemon developers. Justin Watt | April 20, 2006 11:24 AM which is in response to: Are you aware that those of us who read your blog in an aggregator such as FeedDemon see all the HTML markup? Makes it very hard to read, and hard to judge whether a particular post is worth leaving the aggregator for a closer look. Steven Black | April 14, 2006 09:10 AM before I post a bug to FeedDemon for something they are already aware of, does anybody know if they are? -- M:D/ M. David Peterson http://www.xsltblog.com/ -- M:D/ M. David Peterson http://www.xsltblog.com/
Re: Known FeedDemon issue?
http://www.oreillynet.com/xml/blog/2006/04/update_hello_saxon_on_net_an_a.html#comment-25975 Thanks James! On 4/20/06, James Holderness [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: M. David Peterson wrote: Are you aware that those of us who read your blog in an aggregator such as FeedDemon see all the HTML markup? Makes it very hard to read, and hard to judge whether a particular post is worth leaving the aggregator for a closer look. Steven Black | April 14, 2006 09:10 AM before I post a bug to FeedDemon for something they are already aware of, does anybody know if they are? I've just tested with an oldish beta of FeedDemon 2.0 and it looked good to me. It's possible he's using a really ancient version that doesn't have Atom 1.0 support. That might result in the content being interpreted as plaintext. Regards James -- M:D/ M. David Peterson http://www.xsltblog.com/
Re: Known FeedDemon issue?
I misread I'd as I'll -- My bad... I'll make the report :) On 4/20/06, James M Snell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No idea if they're already aware. I'd go ahead and report it. M. David Peterson wrote: http://www.oreillynet.com/xml/blog/2006/04/update_hello_saxon_on_net_an_a.html#comment-25653 Steven, according to the feed validator, the Atom 1.0 feed for the XML blog validates, so I'm assuming there is a bug in FeedDemon. Please report this problem to the FeedDemon developers. Justin Watt | April 20, 2006 11:24 AM which is in response to: Are you aware that those of us who read your blog in an aggregator such as FeedDemon see all the HTML markup? Makes it very hard to read, and hard to judge whether a particular post is worth leaving the aggregator for a closer look. Steven Black | April 14, 2006 09:10 AM before I post a bug to FeedDemon for something they are already aware of, does anybody know if they are? -- M:D/ M. David Peterson http://www.xsltblog.com/ -- M:D/ M. David Peterson http://www.xsltblog.com/
Re: xml:base in your Atom feed
* FOR THE ARCHIVES ONLY -- CORRECTION OF AN ERROR ON A NOW DEAD DISCUSSION. DON'T WORRY ABOUT READING THIS * While on the topic of mis-reads (see April 20th response to James Snell re: Known FeedDemon issue? if reading this in the archives and actually care enough to seek out proper context), I need to repent of this misread: My response: and here I was holding this inside of me as I always assumed obviously it's implemented for a reason This makes me happy :) Thanks Sam! came from reading this: As late as this morning, all link/@href attributes in my Atom feed contained absolute URIs. skimming to this: It would be helpful if people were to update: http://intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/XmlBaseConformanceTests and assuming this was Sam simply stating that using full URI's should be considered a best practice. The next day I reread and realized my mistake, but decided then to just let it be. But in realizing that people might read the archives and walk away completely baffled by my response I decided it would be best to get this error properly documented. On 3/31/06, M. David Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: and here I was holding this inside of me as I always assumed obviously it's implemented for a reason This makes me happy :) Thanks Sam! On 3/31/06, Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Antone Roundy wrote: On Mar 31, 2006, at 4:12 PM, Sam Ruby wrote: Antone Roundy wrote: Sam, Funny that this should come up today given the recent discussion on the mailing list--NetNewsWire isn't getting the links in your Atom feed right. There is an off chance that I have been following the list. ;-) I certainly didn't mean to imply that you weren't--I just wanted to point out what I'm seeing in case you didn't know that this particular feed reader is having this particular problem today. And I thought it might be of interest to the WG to know what NNW is doing given that it's doing something that has been argued against within the last 24 hours. ;-) I don't remember which version of your feed I was subscribed to before--perhaps I wasn't subscribed to the Atom feed and NNW updated my subscription when you redirected to it. So I don't know whether you purposely removed xml:base to see what chaos would ensue, or whether it hasn't been there all along and I just haven't seen the problem since I was subscribed to a different version. As late as this morning, all link/@href attributes in my Atom feed contained absolute URIs. One of the original problems that Atom set out to solve was the desire by people to use relative URIs. Even in their content. In fact, PARTICULARLY in their content. My recent post of Common Feed Errors demonstrate that this demand certainly exists - even in RSS: http://www.intertwingly.net/blog/2006/03/13/Common-Feed-Errors It would be helpful if people were to update: http://intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/XmlBaseConformanceTests - Sam Ruby -- M:D/ M. David Peterson http://www.xsltblog.com/ -- M:D/ M. David Peterson http://www.xsltblog.com/
Re: Known FeedDemon issue?
fixed http://www.oreillynet.com/xml/blog/2006/04/update_hello_saxon_on_net_an_a.html#comment-25989 On 4/20/06, M. David Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I misread I'd as I'll -- My bad... I'll make the report :) On 4/20/06, James M Snell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No idea if they're already aware. I'd go ahead and report it. M. David Peterson wrote: http://www.oreillynet.com/xml/blog/2006/04/update_hello_saxon_on_net_an_a.html#comment-25653 Steven, according to the feed validator, the Atom 1.0 feed for the XML blog validates, so I'm assuming there is a bug in FeedDemon. Please report this problem to the FeedDemon developers. Justin Watt | April 20, 2006 11:24 AM which is in response to: Are you aware that those of us who read your blog in an aggregator such as FeedDemon see all the HTML markup? Makes it very hard to read, and hard to judge whether a particular post is worth leaving the aggregator for a closer look. Steven Black | April 14, 2006 09:10 AM before I post a bug to FeedDemon for something they are already aware of, does anybody know if they are? -- M:D/ M. David Peterson http://www.xsltblog.com/ -- M:D/ M. David Peterson http://www.xsltblog.com/ -- M:D/ M. David Peterson http://www.xsltblog.com/
Out of the office Re: (SPAM: 50) Hello (VIRUS REMOVED)
I'm out of the office from Apr 17 thru Apr 24. I will respond to your email when I return. I will have limited connectivity during this time, so if you require something urgent, then please resend and note [URGENT] in your subject line. Thanks!
