3 ms·

I recently added RSS to my personal site (https://www.tyleo.com/ https://www.tyleo.com/) Even with a custom implementation it’s a simple thing to support. You

by tyleo 2y ago

I recently added RSS to my personal site (https://www.tyleo.com/ https://www.tyleo.com/) Even with a custom implementation it’s a simple thing to support. You can find the whole spec here: https://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification https://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification I’ll mention that there is a competing Atom specification which is compatible with all notable RSS readers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atom_(web_standard) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atom_(web_standard). The POV I’ve seen on HN favors Atom because it offers more functionality and is a clearer standard. I want to voice my support for RSS though based on its simplicity. To me the feed doesn’t need a bunch of bells and whistles. I get analysis paralysis I get deciding which Atom features to support.

oneeyedpigeon 2y ago
> You can find the whole spec here There's also this version, which I believe is the original: https://cyber.harvard.edu/rss/rss.html https://cyber.harvard.edu/rss/rss.html It's far from perfect, but at least it's not infested with spammy advertising.
- tyleo 2y ago
  Interesting. I wouldn’t shave advised a site with spammy ads but it looks like they are sufficiently caught in my ad block.
talideon 2y ago
Use whatever elements you need from Atom. Atom is a functional superset of RSS 2.0, and if you're hit with analysis paralysis, using only the functionality that exists in RSS 2.0 in your Atom feed. Atom exists because RSS is ambiguous and prone to breakage. The "bells and whistles" exist only because there were a lot of common extensions at the time that made sense to fold into Atom itself. Even if you use none of that and just the bits that overlap with RSS 2.0, your feed will be less likely to break in random feed readers, and that's enough reason to use Atom over RSS. In this day and age, there's no good reason to use RSS over Atom beyond brand recognition. (Yes, I'm still salty from the feed wars of the 2000s, but I still stand by all that I've written above.)
- Macha 2y ago
  Also, approximately every feed reader supports both, so you only really need one (once upon a time, sites used to offer 2-3 feeds for different rss standards)

by tyleo 2y ago

oneeyedpigeon 2y ago

> You can find the whole spec here There's also this version, which I believe is the original: https://cyber.harvard.edu/rss/rss.html https://cyber.harvard.edu/rss/rss.html It's far from perfect, but at least it's not infested with spammy advertising.

tyleo 2y ago
Interesting. I wouldn’t shave advised a site with spammy ads but it looks like they are sufficiently caught in my ad block.

talideon 2y ago

Use whatever elements you need from Atom. Atom is a functional superset of RSS 2.0, and if you're hit with analysis paralysis, using only the functionality that exists in RSS 2.0 in your Atom feed. Atom exists because RSS is ambiguous and prone to breakage. The "bells and whistles" exist only because there were a lot of common extensions at the time that made sense to fold into Atom itself. Even if you use none of that and just the bits that overlap with RSS 2.0, your feed will be less likely to break in random feed readers, and that's enough reason to use Atom over RSS. In this day and age, there's no good reason to use RSS over Atom beyond brand recognition. (Yes, I'm still salty from the feed wars of the 2000s, but I still stand by all that I've written above.)

Macha 2y ago
Also, approximately every feed reader supports both, so you only really need one (once upon a time, sites used to offer 2-3 feeds for different rss standards)