Free Newsletters
Technology & Business Daily

InfoWorld
Log-in | Register

  Wednesday, January 21, 2004 

One-click RSS subscriptions, continued: the lesser of two evils?

There's been some ongoing discussion of one-click RSS subscriptions over at Brent's and Dare's sites. Some things I've found out:

  • Here's a spec for the feed: URI scheme.

  • It's possible to hook the feed: URI scheme, system-wide, on Mac OS X and Windows.

  • Although the older version of NetNewsWire Lite I was using didn't support feed: URLs, the newer versions of Lite and Pro do, and I've tested Lite's feed: behavior successfully in both Mozilla and Safari.

  • RSS Bandit is supposed to also support feed: URLs, but I couldn't get it to work with a freshly-downloaded copy. Dare's checking. (Update: Here's the drill. Works for me now in both Mozilla and IE.)

  • I was surprised to note that quicksub produces feed: URLs that look like this -- feed:http://weblog.infoworld.com/udell/rss.xml -- rather than like this -- feed://weblog.infoworld.com/udell/rss.xml. However I note that Dare's spec permits either form; in the degenerate case, http: is inferred.

If this is all mumbo-jumbo to you, here's the take-away. Subscribing to a feed in a browser-based feedreader, such as Radio UserLand or Bloglines, is a no-brainer, because everything works on the click-to-load-a-page model. But it hasn't been a no-brainer to get from the orange XML icon on a web page into a GUI feedreader such as NetNewsWire or RSS Bandit. The feed: URI scheme aims to solve that problem.

It is, however, controversial. As Joe Gregorio points out, the recently-finalized manifesto of the W3C Technical Architecture Group frowns on inventing new URI schemes unnecessarily:

Authors of specifications SHOULD NOT introduce a new URI scheme when an existing scheme provides the desired properties of identifiers and their relation to resources. [Architecture of the World Wide Web]
As usual, I can see both sides. I agree with the TAG that URI schemes should not multiply like rabbits. Yet the alternative -- using mime-types -- seems fraught with peril. The complexity of Joe's explanation makes me think of all the things that work poorly for me, in various browsers on various systems, when mime-types aren't correctly handled, as they so often are not. I'd hate for syndication newcomers to land in another WindowsMedia/QuickTime/RealVideo fireswamp. I'm not certain that the feed: URI scheme is necessary, but at the moment, I'm inclined to think that it's the lesser of two evils.

 


Recent Entries


















































Sponsored Technology Links

 
 
 HOME  NEWS  BLOGS  PODCASTS  VIDEOS  TECHNOLOGIES  TEST CENTER  EVENTS  CAREERS  IT EXEC-CONNECT   About | Advertise | Awards | RSS | Contact Us 

Copyright © 2008, Reprints, Permissions, Licensing, IDG Network, Privacy Policy, Terms of Service.
All Rights reserved. InfoWorld is a leading publisher of technology information and product reviews on topics including viruses,
phishing, worms, firewalls, security, servers, storage, networking, wireless, databases, and web services.

CIO :: ComputerWorld :: CSO :: Demo :: GamePro :: Games.net :: IDG Connect :: IDG World Expo
Industry Standard :: IT World :: JavaWorld :: LinuxWorld :: MacUser :: Macworld :: Network World :: PC World :: Playlist