> The way I read the example feeds, this seemed to comply > with the standard.
I suppose i shouldn't have come up with that topic. What a mess. There seem to be 7 different rss-standards out. I spent some time with them and therefor want to let you all know what I learned: Netscape released the original standard as 0.9 it has a flat architecture with channel, image, and item(s) laying side by side and also had some kind of rdf-syntax: ------------------------------ <?xml version="1.0"?> <rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"; xmlns="http://my.netscape.com/rdf/simple/0.9/";> <channel> <title>Mozilla Dot Org</title> <link>http://www.mozilla.org</link> <description>the Mozilla Organization web site</description> </channel>  <item> <title>New Status Updates</title> <link>http://www.mozilla.org/status/</link> </item> </rdf:RDF> ------------------------------ When Nestcape gave up developping that standard 'Userland' went on with development. They came up with several 0.9x standards. These standards brought new sub-elements to the channel-element and had all the items within the channel-tag. They also abandoned the <rdf:RDF> and replaced it with a <rss>-tag Almost parallel the 'RSS-DEV Working Group' developped the rss 1.0 standard. Their aproache was more rdf-oriented. Tags got xml-namespaces and the item-tags went out of the channel item, but within the channel there is a <items>element representing a list of the <item>-elements (within a <rdf:Seq>). And in the End 'Userland' again released the 2.0-standard. Again with <items> within the channel and lots of additional tags such as <author>, <language>, <copyright>,<managingEditor>, <WebMaster>, <pubDate>, <lastBuildDate>, <Categorie>, <generator>, <docs>, <cluod>, <ttl>(time to live), <rating>, <skiphours>, <skipdays> I believe one has to decide between these two standards 1.0 or 2.0; both produce valid rss-code as far as i could evaluate. I used items out of the channel-tag and still got valid rss. The most important point seems to be 'well formed' xml. g PS: more and better information you will find at: http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2002/12/18/dive-into-xml.html?page=2 ,where i got most of mine from. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
