310494 - Rss 1.0 feeds lack of description in the subject field

Status: RESOLVED WORKSFORME

(MailNews Core :: Feed Reader, defect)

Description

[Gabriele Domenichini]

User-Agent:       Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.10) Gecko/20050730 Firefox/1.0.6
Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.10) Gecko/20050730 Firefox/1.0.6

I've subscribed to the rss 1.0 of xml.com. They say their format has been
checked and it's conformant but each news in Linux (@home) and in windows 2000
(I use at office) don't show the content of the tag description tipical of rss
1.0 in the subject field. I don't have other example of rss 1.0. They say they
know the problem but they have checked the conformance and the format is ok.
Personally I think that rss 1.0 is the most performant format because is
semantic web ready and can incorporate the tag you want by citing the namespace.
Please Don't drop it 

Reproducible: Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1.Subscribe to xml.com rss 1.0 feed
2.look at the news 
3.

Actual Results:  
I see no subject in the subject field. 

Expected Results:  
One month ago there was the content of the <description> tag

Comment 1

[Mike Cowperthwaite]

I see the symptom with TB 1.6a1-0928, Win2K, and with TB 1.0.6.

(In reply to comment #0)

> Expected Results:  
> One month ago there was the content of the <description> tag

So?  What changed?  Which TB build are you using now, and which build were you 
using a month ago?  Sounds to me like the feed has changed.

xref bug 255243, maybe related.

Comment 2

[Gabriele Domenichini]

(In reply to comment #1)
> I see the symptom with TB 1.6a1-0928, Win2K, and with TB 1.0.6.
> (In reply to comment #0)
> > Expected Results:  
> > One month ago there was the content of the <description> tag
> So?  What changed?  Which TB build are you using now, and which build were you 
> using a month ago?  Sounds to me like the feed has changed.
> xref bug 255243, maybe related.
Yes they do have changed it.
in the article http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2005/08/15/syndication_update.html they explain they have submitted the new format to the feed validator and it works. So as long as their new format is concerned, in their opinion the problem is in thunderbird and in the way it read a conformant rss 1.0 feed.

Comment 3

[Mike Cowperthwaite]

The feed listed in the URL field above does not validate at
  http://feedvalidator.org/

It does pass the W3C RDF validator -- but that doesn't imply it's correct for RSS.
  http://www.w3.org/RDF/Validator/

Comment 4

[Gabriele Domenichini]

(In reply to comment #3)
> The feed listed in the URL field above does not validate at
>   http://feedvalidator.org/
> 
> It does pass the W3C RDF validator -- but that doesn't imply it's correct for
> RSS.
>   http://www.w3.org/RDF/Validator/
> 
Ok I'll try to check back with them.

Comment 5

[Justin Watt]

I'm responsible for the oreillynet.com RSS and Atom feeds. The aforementioned error in the XML RSS 1.0 feed was a minor HTML oversight in the CDATA encoded description element of the feed. This has been corrected and the feed currently validates:
http://feedvalidator.org/check.cgi?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.oreillynet.com%2Fpub%2Ffeed%2F20%3Fformat%3Drss1

Comment 6

[Mike Cowperthwaite]

(In reply to comment #5)
> the feed currently validates:

Not at feedvalidator.org, it doesn't.

Comment 7

[Mike Cowperthwaite]

Sorry, my mistake.  I used the URL you posted as the input to feedvalidator.org.

Comment 8

[Justin Watt]

Gabriele discovered that we were not including the appropriate query strings in our RSS 1.0 header as were were in the items, which seems to have been causing the problem. I've fixed the problem on our end and the feed now appears to work in Thunderbird.

Comment 9

[Phil Ringnalda (:philor)]

If the feedvalidator was letting you get away with having different URLs in the items seq and the item rdf:about, don't forget to file a bug on them (us ;)).