Re: xml:base in your Atom feed

2006-04-20 Thread M. David Peterson

* 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: xml:base in your Atom feed

2006-04-01 Thread M. David Peterson
 Hosting is not the point.Yep. 'tis why I said the word backup.On 3/31/06, A. Pagaltzis 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* M. David Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-04-01 03:15]: Obviously the main wiki would be better, but if this can act as a backup plan, then let me know if and when and I will set up
 access to that box for you.Hosting is not the point. I have webspace and I can link files Ihost from the main wiki, as before. Collaboration is the point.I'm hoping for a way for anyone to pitch in without having to
fight any red tape, so that the test suite can be expanded bywhoever happens to have a spare tuit.Regards,--Aristotle Pagaltzis // http://plasmasturm.org/
-- M:D/M. David Petersonhttp://www.xsltblog.com/ 


Re: xml:base in your Atom feed

2006-03-31 Thread Sam Ruby

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.  ;-)

- Sam Ruby



Re: xml:base in your Atom feed

2006-03-31 Thread Antone Roundy


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.




Re: xml:base in your Atom feed

2006-03-31 Thread Sam Ruby

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



Re: xml:base in your Atom feed

2006-03-31 Thread M. David Peterson

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/



Re: xml:base in your Atom feed

2006-03-31 Thread A. Pagaltzis

* Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-04-01 01:50]:
 It would be helpful if people were to update:
 
 http://intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/XmlBaseConformanceTests

For that matter, I’ve been meaning to address some weaknesses in
that test suite which Liferea 1.0 highlights. Liferea does URI
fixup for Atom links in its feed parser, but merely uses the
entry’s alternate URI as the base URI when rendering content.
So it succeeds legitimately on cases that test things like
atom:link, but then accidentally succeeds on a number of cases
that involve atom:content where it should be failing.

I’ve been meaning to add some aggressive tests which use xml:base
values that differ drastically from the nearby alternate URIs in
order to smoke out such coincidentally passing tests, as well as
some intentionally evil tests with `type=xhtml` where xml:base
is set on elements inside the xhtml:div. I expect to see a lot of
aggregators fall from grace with such an expanded test suite.

Sam: is it possible to host the test suites directly on the wiki,
by having pages that consist entirely of verbatim text? Ideally,
the content should be rendered inside the wiki chrome using
`pre` tags, but be downloadable without the chome by way of
adding something like `?display=raw;type=application/atom+xml` to
the page URI. That would make it much easier for more people to
pitch in. I find the collection of tests we have so worryingly
minimal; a lot of the currently lesser used corners of the format
are not being tested at all. It makes me nervous that dirty data
based on current incomplete implementation behaviour may become
too widespread for aggregator developers to be able to ignore it.

Regards,
-- 
Aristotle Pagaltzis // http://plasmasturm.org/



Re: xml:base in your Atom feed

2006-03-31 Thread Sam Ruby

A. Pagaltzis wrote:
 
 Sam: is it possible to host the test suites directly on the wiki,
 by having pages that consist entirely of verbatim text? Ideally,
 the content should be rendered inside the wiki chrome using
 `pre` tags, but be downloadable without the chome by way of
 adding something like `?display=raw;type=application/atom+xml`

At the moment, the raw text can be obtained with ?action=raw

Of course, that means that the non raw text might look a little weird.

I am comfortable enough with the moin code base that I would be willing
to code up a specific action just for this wiki that strips leading {{{
and trailing }}} and then delivers the results raw, with the appropriate
mime type.

How does ?action=atomtest sound?

- Sam Ruby



Re: xml:base in your Atom feed

2006-03-31 Thread A. Pagaltzis

* M. David Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-04-01 03:15]:
 Obviously the main wiki would be better, but if this can act as
 a backup plan, then let me know if and when and I will set up
 access to that box for you.

Hosting is not the point. I have webspace and I can link files I
host from the main wiki, as before. Collaboration is the point.
I’m hoping for a way for anyone to pitch in without having to
fight any red tape, so that the test suite can be expanded by
whoever happens to have a spare tuit.

Regards,
-- 
Aristotle Pagaltzis // http://plasmasturm.org/



Re: xml:base in your Atom feed

2006-03-31 Thread A. Pagaltzis

* Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-04-01 03:40]:
 I am comfortable enough with the moin code base that I would be
 willing to code up a specific action just for this wiki that
 strips leading {{{ and trailing }}} and then delivers the
 results raw, with the appropriate mime type.

Sounds good.

 How does ?action=atomtest sound?

Maybe `action=atom`?

Regards,
-- 
Aristotle Pagaltzis // http://plasmasturm.org/



Re: xml:base in your Atom feed

2006-03-31 Thread James Holderness


A. Pagaltzis wrote:

I’ve been meaning to add some aggressive tests which use xml:base
values that differ drastically from the nearby alternate URIs in
order to smoke out such coincidentally passing tests, as well as
some intentionally evil tests with `type=xhtml` where xml:base
is set on elements inside the xhtml:div. I expect to see a lot of
aggregators fall from grace with such an expanded test suite.


Yep. I've run tests like that. Haven't found a single aggregator (including 
my own) that handled xml:base on the xhtml:div or deeper.



I find the collection of tests we have so worryingly
minimal; a lot of the currently lesser used corners of the format
are not being tested at all.


Agreed. For various political reasons I don't want to get involved with test 
creation, but I do contribute results when I get a chance (I suspect more 
than half the xml:base results were added by me). I think you might get more 
involvement if the tests were easier to use though. By that I mean tests 
that say exactly how they should be interpreted and that you can see at a 
glance whether you've got a pass or failure. Having to click through links 
to see if they are valid can get a bit tiresome when you've trying to 
evaluate 16 tests on 20 different aggregators.


Regards
James



Re: xml:base in your Atom feed

2006-03-31 Thread James Holderness


Eric Scheid wrote:

On 1/4/06 12:24 PM, James Holderness [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
one way would be to use img / instead of a / links, with each test 
image
being specific to the test ... that way all one needs to do is read the 
feed

and check to see if the text in the image corresponds to the text in the
entry headline. Especially easy if the tests were numbered.


My thoughts exactly. You can see an example in one of my base tests here:

http://216.93.169.119/atomtests/base/base4.atom

That test is a lot more complicated than need be for a conformance tests 
since it's more informative than simply testing pass/failure, but it 
demonstrates the concept.


And the bit about numbering is also something I forgot to mention 
previously. Many aggregators will reorder the results of a feed in ways that 
might not be expected. By clearly numbering every test you can avoid any 
confusion when it comes to matching the results from the feed back to the 
wiki page.


Regards
James