2 ms·

Can you tell me why? I’m always interested in hearing from people with different opinions.

rambambram 3y ago
Well, I really get your point. If I would use RSS mainly for it's newspaper-like newsreader function, excerpts would indeed be the last thing I want. Just give me the full article, in that case. I foresee another function for RSS. I call it Really Social Sites, and what I do with it is more like a timeline. A timeline that you see at regular social media. My site offers it's own feed to the web, but it also has a reader-function where I follow all kinds of websites. So far nothing different. Except that I can only see short excerpts from the sites I follow. I do this on purpose, because I think it's important to visit the site. I think it's respectful, because people put effort in their sites, people want to know - at least a little bit - how many visitors they had, maybe also where these visitors came from. And from a user point of view, while visiting somebody's website you might stumble upon something unexpectedly nice. One might be compelled to leave a message for the site owner on some contact form after a good article. Etc.
- manuelmoreale 3y ago
  Thank you for explaining this. I see what you mean and it’s great that you want to take the extra step to actually visit the site rather than consuming content directly on the feed. It’s something I also do I’d say 70% of the time. Some sites are just too enjoyable to browse and I prefer to read there. Others are not so great (bad typography and bad colors can make the reading experience very unpleasant) and I read on my RSS in those cases. Which is why I think full content in rss feeds should be the way to go. It allows me to chose how to consume the content. If you only serve excerpts I have no other option but to read on the site even if the reading experience is terrible. Maybe the solution here is to have two feeds?

Well, I really get your point. If I would use RSS mainly for it's newspaper-like newsreader function, excerpts would indeed be the last thing I want. Just give me the full article, in that case. I foresee another function for RSS. I call it Really Social Sites, and what I do with it is more like a timeline. A timeline that you see at regular social media. My site offers it's own feed to the web, but it also has a reader-function where I follow all kinds of websites. So far nothing different. Except that I can only see short excerpts from the sites I follow. I do this on purpose, because I think it's important to visit the site. I think it's respectful, because people put effort in their sites, people want to know - at least a little bit - how many visitors they had, maybe also where these visitors came from. And from a user point of view, while visiting somebody's website you might stumble upon something unexpectedly nice. One might be compelled to leave a message for the site owner on some contact form after a good article. Etc.

manuelmoreale 3y ago
Thank you for explaining this. I see what you mean and it’s great that you want to take the extra step to actually visit the site rather than consuming content directly on the feed. It’s something I also do I’d say 70% of the time. Some sites are just too enjoyable to browse and I prefer to read there. Others are not so great (bad typography and bad colors can make the reading experience very unpleasant) and I read on my RSS in those cases. Which is why I think full content in rss feeds should be the way to go. It allows me to chose how to consume the content. If you only serve excerpts I have no other option but to read on the site even if the reading experience is terrible. Maybe the solution here is to have two feeds?