[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
The main problem with dates in the major RSS specs is that they are optional. It seems you are complaining about people using invalid date formats which have nothing to do with the specs given that both major flavors of RSS have well-defined descriptions of what valid dates look like.
--
PITHY WORDS OF WISDOM
Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the Earth, minus 40% inheritance tax.
________________________________
From: Bob Wyman [mailto:bob@wyman.us]
Sent: Mon 2/2/2004 2:24 PM
To: Joshua Allen; 'Michael Champion'; 'XML DEV'
Subject: RE: [xml-dev] best practice for providing newsfeeds ?
Joshua Allen wrote:
>> original creation. (Atom defines both "created" date and "issued"
>> date. This allows the distinction to be made.)
> Great, a techie feature. My grandmother certainly didn't ask for
that one.
Well, other people's grandmothers *did*. Every day I get mail
from someone asking: "Why are you telling me that this entry which is
dated "August-2003" is "New"? How stupid is your code that it can't
read a date!"
The lack of metadata in RSS confuses users more than it
confuses us.
|
