16 Jul 2005
How About “Up and Atom”? No…?
It looks like they’ve produced a sensible format, and the specification is clear and unambiguous. I’ve only spotted a couple of details that bother me:
commentsshould be on the basic list of permitted link relationships? Without a link for each entry, some users may create/read fewer comments.
- The spec. should clarify whether
<content type="html">can/should use
CDATAto avoid having to escape the entire entry’s markup.
It took me about an hour this morning to add Atom 1.0 support to this site’s weblog system, but the feed won’t be going live until better support is in place on the reading side of things (Bloglines and Firefox couldn’t cope with it). Judging from how iffy a few of the known Atom 1.0 feeds look (clutter, outdated elements, incorrect escaping in
content), it’ll take a while for developers to fully get to grips with it.
Atom’s also got its work cut out in terms of getting noticed. You don’t see ‘Subscribe’ or ‘XML’ buttons on the BBC site, you see ‘RSS’. Promoting multiple formats usually results in too much clutter and confusion, so RSS will probably dominate for years to come (which is fine, it’s adequate).