Nick Bradbury: I also tested FeedDemon’s OPML import
with the OPML exported by a wide array of other aggregators, and
here are the most common problems I’ve found
To date, I’ve avoided OPML discussions. As a single
example: the spec
doesn’t mention the created attribute. The
guidelinesdon’t eitherUpdate:do
now. But
this
post gives me hope that there will someday be a relaunched OPML
with a less ambitious scope and a more precisely defined spec.
But more importantly, now there are tangible test cases.
Note: FeedValidator support for OPML is not in
beta. It is not in alpha. It could all be removed
tomorrow. If you think it is important, but needs to be
improved, please send
test
cases.
I’ll try to find my test cases and email them to you. That would only be fair since the RSV is also using 1000 of your test cases. BTW, text is not required nor is their a limit on the value of type (even a warning is wrong), unless of course, Dave released OPML v 1.2 without my knowing. Last, were you still going to forward me Atom 0.3 queries?
Sam Ruby has introduced OPML validation into his FeedValidator. As usually, he’s created a set of contrived samples to show the difference between the three validators; Dave’s OPML Validator, my Really Simple Validator and the FeedValidator. The...
I hope you can do some good; my experiences with OPML are that there is practically no interop, because it’s a Rorschach test more than a specified format. It’s so utterly semantic-free, you can pretty much use it for whatever, but god help you if you want to read it with a different program.
Last time I did any amount of importing/exporting between different aggregators (admittedly quite a while ago now) I found it failed maybe 1/3 of the time. But the format does seem to be the de facto standard (?!) for that purpose, so I think any tightening up of its specification, even if it is isn’t actually in the spec doc, is to be welcomed. More generally, I think Mark sums it up well.
I have a couple of test cases for you. Admittedly most of them you are already checking, but they weren’t covered by the tests in your errors folder so I figured you might be interested anyway. Unfortunately I couldn’t find an email address for you anywhere - is there anywhere in particular you would like them sent?
Warning: as this area is controversial, I don’t plan to deviate from the results of OPML Validator Beta unless the spec is crystal clear. Nick’s tests were of that kind. For everything else, follow Dave Winer’s request: If you spot a problem, please post a note on the OPML weblog.
OPML validation included in popular feed validatorSam Ruby’s FeedValidator now includes OPML (Outline Processor Markup Language) validation. The controversy seems to surround the spec.The Really Simple Validator validates against the spec, as...
Nick Bradbury writes:Bottom line: the imprecise RSS specification resulted in a lot of guess work, which complicated things for developers, end users and feed producers.The solution? We clarified the RSS spec.The solution? We clarified the RSS spec....
I managed to recover my laptop battery within two weeks of good charging practices and despite its old age. It’s an ASUS, just in case you were interested, and it’s been serving me well since the last quarter of 2001 when I bought it. As...