Comment Re:RSS vs. ATOM (Score 1) 249
>RSS has 11 different varieties, 9 if you exclude the two attempts at an "RSS 3". Atom has a single variety.
If you count Atom 0.3 and Atom 1.0 a "single variety", then yes.
>RSS 1.0 has a way to include HTML in the feed. RSS 2.0 doesn't. Atom does, and also supports XHTML
RSS 2.0 can include HTML in feeds just fine. That's how the Metaweblog API are implemented, btw.
>RSS 1.0 is extensible in a standard way via namespaces. RSS 2.0 is extended via ad-hoc additions. Atom is extensible via namespaces.
RSS 2.0 is perfectly extensible via namespaces, like iTunes did. As an aside, that's the only way RSS can be extended, short of completely ignoring the spec.
>Atom is more complicated than RSS 1.0, which is more complicated than RSS 2.0.
For you, maybe. All of them are fairly simple to implement for any programmer that doesn't flip burgers during his workday.
But hey, four sentences, four mistakes. You almost beat the original topic in wrongness!
If you count Atom 0.3 and Atom 1.0 a "single variety", then yes.
>RSS 1.0 has a way to include HTML in the feed. RSS 2.0 doesn't. Atom does, and also supports XHTML
RSS 2.0 can include HTML in feeds just fine. That's how the Metaweblog API are implemented, btw.
>RSS 1.0 is extensible in a standard way via namespaces. RSS 2.0 is extended via ad-hoc additions. Atom is extensible via namespaces.
RSS 2.0 is perfectly extensible via namespaces, like iTunes did. As an aside, that's the only way RSS can be extended, short of completely ignoring the spec.
>Atom is more complicated than RSS 1.0, which is more complicated than RSS 2.0.
For you, maybe. All of them are fairly simple to implement for any programmer that doesn't flip burgers during his workday.
But hey, four sentences, four mistakes. You almost beat the original topic in wrongness!
