It’s not terribly common in general, but in content about HTML, if you put things like HTML tag names in titles, it will get mangled by some (most?) feed readers if the feed is RSS. )Ĭan we please stop talking about RSS and talk about feeds? A bit like we finally mostly stopped talking about SSL in favour of TLS. (Look through older comments of mine for more explanation and reasons. RSS is even harder to write correctly than Atom, due to things like using a weird date format.
RSS is simply a hopelessly incorrect format, whereas Atom models content types properly. Where Atom and RSS are both supported, you should always prefer Atom, because RSS has the potential to mess things up because it leaves the client to guess whether certain fields are text or HTML. If you’re doing any other type of feed, use Atom, because it’s technically substantially superior to RSS and supported just as well.
If you’re doing podcasts, use RSS, because almost nothing supports Atom there, because for all practical purposes Apple took over and froze the ecosystem at a certain point in time that was just before Atom became popular and fixed up the mess that was RSS. > (Note: there's something very similar to RSS called "Atom", but all modern apps work equally with both.)
It never ceases to frustrate me that these sorts of articles invariably focus on RSS, and say little to nothing about Atom.
0 kommentar(er)
