From: Austin Ziegler <austin@...>
Date: 2003-05-19T11:06:42+09:00
Subject: Re: Which RSS?

On Mon, 19 May 2003 10:56:55 +0900, Jim Freeze wrote:
> On Monday, 19 May 2003 at 10:50:59 +0900, Chad Fowler wrote:
>> You actually have 3 choices. :)
>> 
>> So, the answer is (imo) that Austin's library would be the best,
>> but it's not quite ready. And, it doesn't do 1.0. Depends on what
>> your needs are, though I would say that going with 0.9x and 2.0
>> will give you more coverage. I may be wrong, but from what I can
>> see, 2.0 is going to sunset 1.0.
> Well, I'm an rss newby, so when you say more limited, do you mean
> limited in the rss feeds that I can parse/read, or limited in what
> others will be able to parse of what I publish?

How long can you wait? If you can wait until the end of the month,
I'll try to have a much more flexible version available (I'm trying
to close out some quick work on the PDF library before I tackle some
much heavier work with it).

By more limited, he means that I followed the wrong rules when
programming it. It doesn't work with most 2.0 and 0.9x RSS feeds on
the 'net yet; there are several sets of rules out there that I could
have chosen from, and I chose the wrong ones (:

What you publish, however, will be readable in anything that
supports RSS 0.9x or 2.0.

-austin
-- Austin Ziegler, austin@halostatue.ca on 2003.05.18 at 22:03:31