Comments on: Feed validation confusion http://decafbad.com/blog/2004/05/02/feed-validation-confusion It's all spinning wheels and self-doubt until the first pot of coffee. Fri, 19 Mar 2010 00:06:39 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0-alpha By: kellan http://decafbad.com/blog/2004/05/02/feed-validation-confusion/comment-page-1#comment-1168 kellan Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.decafbad.com/blog/?p=518#comment-1168 <p>Now you're just being silly. Of course the Userland validator doesn't validate RSS 1.0</p> Now you’re just being silly. Of course the Userland validator doesn’t validate RSS 1.0

]]> By: Mark http://decafbad.com/blog/2004/05/02/feed-validation-confusion/comment-page-1#comment-1169 Mark Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.decafbad.com/blog/?p=518#comment-1169 <p>It used to. The scripting.com validator is just a fork of our validator, and they gave identical results on all input when Dave forked our validator 3 months ago. This difference is new since then, and we haven't touched the RSS 1.0 validation rules.</p> It used to. The scripting.com validator is just a fork of our validator, and they gave identical results on all input when Dave forked our validator 3 months ago. This difference is new since then, and we haven’t touched the RSS 1.0 validation rules.

]]> By: Mark http://decafbad.com/blog/2004/05/02/feed-validation-confusion/comment-page-1#comment-1170 Mark Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.decafbad.com/blog/?p=518#comment-1170 <p>Rogers Cadenhead has put up a test RSS 2.0 feed which exhibits similar behavior:</p> <p>http://www.cadenhead.org/hype/index.xml</p> Rogers Cadenhead has put up a test RSS 2.0 feed which exhibits similar behavior:

http://www.cadenhead.org/hype/index.xml

]]> By: Phil Ringnalda http://decafbad.com/blog/2004/05/02/feed-validation-confusion/comment-page-1#comment-1171 Phil Ringnalda Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.decafbad.com/blog/?p=518#comment-1171 <p>In the interest of debugging, I borrowed a copy of Rogers' feed and shuffled the order of things around, so that dc wasn't the first namespace declared, and wasn't the first namespaced element encountered. The dc elements remain the only ones reported as errors.</p> <p>I wish I knew the code better, to know exactly what it would take to have that happen to it.</p> In the interest of debugging, I borrowed a copy of Rogers’ feed and shuffled the order of things around, so that dc wasn’t the first namespace declared, and wasn’t the first namespaced element encountered. The dc elements remain the only ones reported as errors.

I wish I knew the code better, to know exactly what it would take to have that happen to it.

]]> By: Phil Ringnalda http://decafbad.com/blog/2004/05/02/feed-validation-confusion/comment-page-1#comment-1172 Phil Ringnalda Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.decafbad.com/blog/?p=518#comment-1172 <p>Or maybe I do - looks to me like the only way you would get that particular error would be if src/feedvalidator/base.py didn't have the line for dc in the namespaces hash.</p> Or maybe I do – looks to me like the only way you would get that particular error would be if src/feedvalidator/base.py didn’t have the line for dc in the namespaces hash.

]]> By: Phil Ringnalda http://decafbad.com/blog/2004/05/02/feed-validation-confusion/comment-page-1#comment-1173 Phil Ringnalda Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.decafbad.com/blog/?p=518#comment-1173 <p>Les, are you doing the Time Warp, again? Looks like comment timestamps are something like 14 hours slow.</p> Les, are you doing the Time Warp, again? Looks like comment timestamps are something like 14 hours slow.

]]> By: Sam Ruby http://decafbad.com/blog/2004/05/02/feed-validation-confusion/comment-page-1#comment-1174 Sam Ruby Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.decafbad.com/blog/?p=518#comment-1174 <p>Phil, if there were a version of the feedvalidator without that line present, the net effect would be that the dublin core namespace would be treated as "unknown" and you would see results very different from you are seeing: namely that everything in that namespace would be treated as a valid extension.</p> <p>I've sent a note off to Andrew Grummet asking if he knows of any changes to the rss.scripting.com web site that would explain this.</p> Phil, if there were a version of the feedvalidator without that line present, the net effect would be that the dublin core namespace would be treated as “unknown” and you would see results very different from you are seeing: namely that everything in that namespace would be treated as a valid extension.

I’ve sent a note off to Andrew Grummet asking if he knows of any changes to the rss.scripting.com web site that would explain this.

]]> By: Charles Miller http://decafbad.com/blog/2004/05/02/feed-validation-confusion/comment-page-1#comment-1175 Charles Miller Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.decafbad.com/blog/?p=518#comment-1175 <p>Funky.</p> Funky.

]]> By: Andrew Grumet http://decafbad.com/blog/2004/05/02/feed-validation-confusion/comment-page-1#comment-1176 Andrew Grumet Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.decafbad.com/blog/?p=518#comment-1176 <p>Working on it...</p> Working on it…

]]> By: Andrew Grumet http://decafbad.com/blog/2004/05/02/feed-validation-confusion/comment-page-1#comment-1177 Andrew Grumet Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.decafbad.com/blog/?p=518#comment-1177 <p>I think this is fixed now. If you happen to know when the behavior change occurred, could you send me a note at aegrumet@alum.mit.edu? Thanks.</p> I think this is fixed now. If you happen to know when the behavior change occurred, could you send me a note at aegrumet@alum.mit.edu? Thanks.

]]> By: Andrew Grumet http://decafbad.com/blog/2004/05/02/feed-validation-confusion/comment-page-1#comment-1178 Andrew Grumet Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.decafbad.com/blog/?p=518#comment-1178 <p>0xDECAFBAD dude, I think your CSS has the IE6 peekaboo bug (do a Web search on it). I fixed this on my own weblog by adding a "line-height: 1.3em;" to the .content section of my stylesheet.</p> 0xDECAFBAD dude, I think your CSS has the IE6 peekaboo bug (do a Web search on it). I fixed this on my own weblog by adding a “line-height: 1.3em;” to the .content section of my stylesheet.

]]> By: Andrew Grumet http://decafbad.com/blog/2004/05/02/feed-validation-confusion/comment-page-1#comment-1179 Andrew Grumet Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.decafbad.com/blog/?p=518#comment-1179 <p>Thanks for the heads up, and Phil, thanks for the debug suggestions. I don't yet understand what went wrong but we didn't fork any of the project files and the fix didn't require file edits; it was tweak in our setup. After putting the baby to bed I'm going to dig around a bit more.</p> Thanks for the heads up, and Phil, thanks for the debug suggestions. I don’t yet understand what went wrong but we didn’t fork any of the project files and the fix didn’t require file edits; it was tweak in our setup. After putting the baby to bed I’m going to dig around a bit more.

]]> By: l.m.orchard http://decafbad.com/blog/2004/05/02/feed-validation-confusion/comment-page-1#comment-1180 l.m.orchard Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.decafbad.com/blog/?p=518#comment-1180 <p>Andrew: Yay! Makes sense now...</p> <p>And, ugh, I was was wondering what the hell that bug was, and if it name. Grr.</p> Andrew: Yay! Makes sense now…

And, ugh, I was was wondering what the hell that bug was, and if it name. Grr.

]]> By: Phil Ringnalda http://decafbad.com/blog/2004/05/02/feed-validation-confusion/comment-page-1#comment-1181 Phil Ringnalda Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.decafbad.com/blog/?p=518#comment-1181 <p>Andrew Bowden [1] might know, since he says he was signed up for validation reports by email and the errors cropped up "last week."</p> <p>[1] http://www.bods.me.uk/rantnrave/2004/04/03/new_atom_full_post_feed.live</p> Andrew Bowden [1] might know, since he says he was signed up for validation reports by email and the errors cropped up “last week.”

[1] http://www.bods.me.uk/rantnrave/2004/04/03/new_atom_full_post_feed.live

]]> By: Phil Ringnalda http://decafbad.com/blog/2004/05/02/feed-validation-confusion/comment-page-1#comment-1182 Phil Ringnalda Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.decafbad.com/blog/?p=518#comment-1182 <p>I don't think this is going to be my week. Can't read code, can't follow simple directions.</p> <p>Er, "Hey, Les! Could you email Andrew and tell him..." Sigh.</p> <p>But at least I screwed up in a new way: I think that's the first time I've carefully checked whether HTML was allowed, noticed from the preview that it wasn't, copied in an MT-produced URL, and had the filename Textiled into oblivion :)</p> I don’t think this is going to be my week. Can’t read code, can’t follow simple directions.

Er, “Hey, Les! Could you email Andrew and tell him…” Sigh.

But at least I screwed up in a new way: I think that’s the first time I’ve carefully checked whether HTML was allowed, noticed from the preview that it wasn’t, copied in an MT-produced URL, and had the filename Textiled into oblivion :)

]]>