Subject: Re: Change Proposal to HTML WG to fix the algorithm for generating Atom feeds from HTML content

From: Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 18:33:45 +0200

On 06.04.2010 23:17, Julian Reschke wrote:
>
> FYI:
>
> this relates to an HTML-WG discussion about the algorithm to create Atom
> feeds from HTML (<http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#atom>).
>
> See <http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7806> and
> <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/86> for more context on how we
> got here.
>
> Best regards, Julian
> ...

In the meantime, the HTML WG has decided to drop this part of the spec. 
See <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010May/0391.html>.

Best regards, Julian

---

From: Asbjørn Ulsberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 22:11:56 +0200

On Wed, 07 Apr 2010 10:16:26 +0200, Julian Reschke <[email-masked]>  
wrote:

> I think the reason that was presented is that people prefer to publish  
> just HTML instead of HTML + a feed. Should be somewhere in the WHATWG  
> archives.
>
> Personally, I don't buy that. HTML pages that qualify as material for  
> news feeds are usually generated from a different source, such as a  
> database of news entries, or actually a feed document (this is how I do  
> it). Publishing both is simple, and actually saves bandwidth for those  
> just needing the Atom version.

This what I'm thinking as well. If there's no back-end store and all you  
have is text of some sort stored in the file system, 99 out of 100 times  
I'd choose to store Atom documents in the file system and transform these  
to HTML with XSLT rather than the other way around, especially when the  
algorithm defined to do so is so ridiculous as it is.

>> Frankly I'd toss the whole thing out. Then again, I'd say the same for a
>> good deal of HTML5.
>
> Same here.

+1.

-- 
Asbjørn Ulsberg         -=|=-          [email-masked]
«He's a loathsome offensive brute, yet I can't look away»