1189084 - RSS items show incorrect URL

Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX

(Thunderbird :: Untriaged, defect)

Description

[Jim C. Nasby]

Attachment: rss20.xml

User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/38.0
Build ID: 20150525141253

Steps to reproduce:

Subscribe to an RSS feed that includes items which have <guid isPermaLink="true">. Example of this is attached, pulled from http://planet.postgresql.org/rss20.xml


Actual results:

Link displayed for post "Josh Berkus: unsafe UPSERT using WITH clauses" is <guid> element (tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7476449567742726187.post-2774102237773628331) instead of <link> element (http://www.databasesoup.com/2015/07/unsafe-upsert-using-with-clauses.html).


Expected results:

Should have displayed contents of <link> element.

This was reported in bug 624535, which was marked as a duplicate of another bug. *This is still a problem for users*. Users don't care whether blogger.com is or isn't breaking RSS; they care that they can't get to the original article when using thunderbird.

Comment 1

[alta88]

Inform the publisher to read, understand, and implement the RSS2.0[1] spec.  In this case, it means setting isPermaLink="false" because, in fact, it's not a link.  The decision made on this long ago in Bug 624535 was correct.

[1] http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification

Comment 3

[Jim C. Nasby]

READ MY ORIGINAL REPORT:

"This was reported in bug 624535, which was marked as a duplicate of another bug. *This is still a problem for users*. Users don't care whether blogger.com is or isn't breaking RSS; they care that they can't get to the original article when using thunderbird."

So does the Thunderbird community not care about usability?

*Blogger.com* is NOT going to go fixing there stuff because Joe User claims that they're breaking the RSS spec, regardless of whether they are or not.

Comment 4

[Jim C. Nasby]

Example from attachment of *google* (Blogger.com) doing this wrong:

<guid isPermaLink="true">tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7476449567742726187.post-7814360070053193786</guid><pubDate>Tue, 28 Jul 2015 16:52:00 GMT</pubDate></item>

Comment 5

[alta88]

It would be malpractice to add even one line of complexity or extra processing, on each refresh for each feed for each user, due to this feed's inability to follow spec.