Talk:RSS/Archive 1

486:"Speaking of RSS, here's my read on what happened. (I wasn't directly involved.) A group of people involved in RSS got together to start thinking about its future evolution. Dave was part of the group. When the consensus of the group turned in a direction he didn't like, Dave stopped participating, and characterized it as a plot by O'Reilly to take over RSS from him, despite the fact that Rael Dornfest of O'Reilly was only one of about a dozen authors of the proposed RSS 1.0 spec, and that many of those who were part of its development had at least as long a history with RSS as Dave had. The only connection I can see is that the O'Reilly Network ran a series of ads on our sites promoting its stories about the RSS 1.0 spec (just as it promotes other stories on O'Reilly Network sites). Dave never approached me directly to express a point of view such as 'I think the RSS spec is going in the wrong direction. Is there anything you can do to help get my point of view across to the other developers?' Instead, the first I heard of it was a series of public accusations that my company was leading a conspiracy to steal 'Dave's' standard." Tim O'Reilly 9/20/2000 3789:. The significant difference between Winer's archived spec and the current spec, in sentences you can consider for inclusion on Knowledge: "In June 2007, the RSS Advisory Board revised the specification to reflect our judgment that RSS 2.0 permits namespaces to extend core elements with namespace attributes, as Microsoft is doing in Internet Explorer 7. A difference of interpretation left publishers unsure of whether this was permitted or forbidden." The board can't force others to accept our role in RSS as official. But it's my hope that with our public voting and the inclusion of members from all over the RSS development community, we've created a framework for resolving contentious subjects like this namespace issue. 164:

months later" reference between 1.0 and .92, because no source was given and the documents the two references linked to mention the same month -- early and late December 2000. Let the who-came-first arguments go on elsewhere. Also defined "forked" for non-technical readers. I noticed that Winer's connection with Userland was not mentioned at all, so added that at the first reference to him and in the later section on transfer of the spec. And I tried to clarify the time sequence for 2.0 -- it was issued before the Harvard transfer. Also added Winer's departure from the advisory board.

1246:"Hello Mushroom, what's up with this banner? I did not notice any suggestions from you on the Talk page. Some of us have been riding the spam links pretty hard lately, and we have a 'Discuss links here' section on the Talk page as recommended by WP:WPSPAM. I admit that I enjoyed your deletion of that one link you removed. The Specifications and the History sections seem appropriately linked. There are also two Tutorials that I haven't closely studied, but appear legitimate. Can you suggest other links that you believe should not make the cut? 1674:

pressure for external links, perhaps, but these links are here for months, and that doesn't answer to the question: are tutorials things to link or not. Your opinion has evoluted since the start of the discussion as now this depends upon the article and the editors!!! I have no "desire" for external links nor internal link in the see also section, I believe this is right. But you have not answered to that also, is the link to social networking good or not? This depends also if social networking is using RSS or no, and sure, it does.

31: 3195:. Another possible benefit of the change is that it should prevent a Knowledge fork in the history, so that somebody with a new citation adds to info in this article but doesn't realize that an incorrect version still lurks in a different article. My intention is good, please don't flame me. Please discuss if you do or don't think the separate article is a good idea, and if so how much of the history from this article should get moved there. 4065:'s rewrite of the History section seems good. My only comment would be that this article is overloaded on history, and the nuances of the different RSS X.YY versions are no longer all that relevant. Most reader programs take the new versions of all formats, so far as I can tell. I like the balance and motivation that James has achieved in his version, and suggest that much of his new text be considered for moving to 1694:

confusing, then it should be made better. Find whatever insight the tutorial may have and then merge that nugget of information back into the article itself. Articles with long lists of links are generally those that haven't been carefully watched, for whatever reason. It's also worth looking at some featured articles (see WP:FA) which are examples of the very best articles, to see how they handle their references.

3944: 1236:'s talk page. I asked about the {{external links}} banner that he had put on the page. (It's the thing that says 'The external links for this article may require cleanup'. Please read the following and see if you agree that the two links should be removed. If no response, I'll do it in a couple of days, and remove the 'external links' banner at the same time. 1377:. I moved old threads there in Werdnabot style, and kept only those threads in which new comments were added later than 1 Sept 2006. Comments not signed by their authors were deleted unless they were key to a conversation, but they can still be found in the page history. Very long threads now only go back to 1 January, 2006. See archive for earlier. 3234:

the various XML-tags used in RSS files need to be described. The examples mean nothing when there are no explanations either. Also, are those files supposed to be done with Notepad or are there possibly dedicated editors? Automatic feed generators? How do you publish your feed? Do you need special server equipment, scripts, something else? --

3520:

brings up our RSS article as having the fourth-highest Google rank of any Knowledge article. This could be an argument for someone to spend time improving the article! (See the original posting for the logic behing this claim). On the off-chance that the submitter's argument is correct, here are the

3233:

I have to say that this article is a disappointment. It explains how to read RSS feeds, then there are long parts about the history and incompatibilities, some other minor stuff and two bloated examples. Absolutely nothing on how to create an RSS feed! That's half of the whole concept anyway! I think

2200:. In my view, the 'Genres' are a particular waste of space, because many of these categories are empty. (Empty categories are at risk of deletion). Please discuss here if you have an opinion. Without a consensus here supporting the inclusion of the Podcasting template, I think it should be removed. 616:

Somebody asked on this discussion why RSS? My answer is so I can display updated content on my website that updates itself automatically from the major news services, or any other content that is in RSS format for that matter. I'm sure I'm one of hundreds of thousands of people stuck trying to do the

608:

I've been running all over the web looking for RSS creation/aggregator tools over the past few weeks and I've just about driven myself crazy. Making RSS feeds doesn't seem to be the challenge--you simply write up an XML file in a particular format, of which there are thousands of samples available on

267:

I have a NPOV concern about the following passage from the usage section: "As the mainstream media attempts to realize the full potential of RSS, the new media is utilizing RSS by bypassing traditional news sources. Consumers and journalists are now able to have news constantly fed to them instead of

163:

In "Usage," added references to newspapers and wire services using RSS; moved up the reference to blogs using RSS for full text, not just summaries, and the relation of blogs to multimedia. Introduced the "syndication" concept earlier, trying to help explain the name. In "History," removed a "several

3808:

The current text points to a mailing list post of mine, in which it is claimed that I cite three specific differences between the two specs. I did nothing of the sort. It was Sam that was claiming those three areas were different, and I was disagreeing with him. In any event, none of that discussion

2210:

I agree and have removed it for now. It might be appropriate later once some more folks have worked on it and have cleaned it up. From its history, only one editor appears to have edited it and it was just created today. It's a good idea but I think it needs a lot of polishing before being placed

1548:

About the "see also" section, once you have removed the link to social networking it becomes useless as Atom is already linked into the body of the article. And all websites dedicated to social networking are using RSS feed (and blogrolls). Bloglines that is linked from the main article (Usage) is a

1344:

Although RSS wasn't originally intended for this purpose, it has very much been adopted by the podcasting community as a convenient method of syndicating audio content. Podcasts are continuing to increase in popularity, and podcast RSS feeds are already a significant percentage of all RSS feeds out

861:

I have added a sentence that helps explain an RSS feed in very general terms. These do not contribute to the length of the article significantly. I added the sentences at the behest of a friend, because he visited the article before the addition and still had no idea what an RSS feed is. I feel it's

778:

RSS is certainly not a file format or a protocol. if anything it is a standard for content delivery. why would somone who doesn't understand the article take it upon themselves to define the term? XML is not a file format either. if i can type a document in notepad that has XML or RSS structure,

620:

For being Really Simple Syndication, RSS sure seems pretty complicated to display. There are sites that provide modules for getting RSS feeds to display on your website, but they are either buggy, or require knowledge of databases, or only explain what to do, not how to do, none of which I'm able to

4095:

Looks good to me. The only remaining mystery would be, 'Did the world really need the Atom spec? Exactly what types of things was RSS unable to deal with?' Since this is a mystery that may not have occurred to most RSS users, who simply use RSS (or Atom) and don't perceive any remaining problems, I

3855:

Yes, they installed a MediaWiki extension for highlighting of computer programming code: see bugzilla:7163. It is as official as wiki syntax is. And if you ask me how this works... well, it works very poorly (hideous colours, no inline option, ignorance of the standard wiki syntax et c.) To use it,

3784:

Thanks. Atom's syndication format has completed the IETF process. The thing that's still working its way through is the publishing protocol. As for RSS, I'm just pointing out that we're doing exactly what we've done since our group was founded by Brent Simmons, Jon Udell and Dave Winer. Winer has a

3764:

draft process. But my understanding is that no current version of RSS is issued by a standards organization, so we merely have two informal groups with competing documents. If your argument is found convincing by other Wikipedians, your document would at most be recognized as the 'official RSS spec

3389:

How do the pieces fit together? Does the RSS reader typically poll the site providing the feed? Does the sitr providing the feed typically create the outgoing feed for each request, or cache it periodically? If my reader polls the feeding site periodically, how does it tell which items are new, and

1493:

As I have written above, spams are not in this section but in the body of the article instead. Lot of external links, not really involved by the content of the article. Lot of websites that are not dedicated to RSS. For the tutorial section, I don't understand your complaint. This is content useful

1482:

Please tell me if there are objections to removing all the new content added since 27 December. It looks to be mostly spam and adds little to the article. I particularly object to the silly 'Tutorials and References section', which has little to do with the RSS *file format*. Everyone in the world

331:

may be a more appropriate page to move it to, though I really think your problem is with the content itself and not its location. If Knowledge is not a web directory, how does moving said web directory to another page solve the problem? Maybe you should edit the page in place to what's notable, and

150:

Just edited the article, in the hope to make it a bit more concise, and user friendly. Removed some wrong information (RSS 1.0 is not a W3C standard) and the rather strong Userland bias. I also took the liberty to provide information on what RSS is good for before describing the gory details of how

4002:

proposal is on any standards track, at W3C or elsewhere. It seems to be the product of a small organization called the Open Geospatial Consortium. There is a roadmap, but it has no entries in it. Lacking more details, I argue that GeoRSS is only a proposal, and is not yet mainstream enough for the

3967:

When I check an RSS feed for updates I have to download ~1 KiB of data each time. If I check 10 feeds for updates once a minute, I waste a lot of bandwidth for downloading the exact same content. Is it possible to just download a little hash of the complete RSS feed data I would normally download?

3685:

With regards to Netscape possessing any trademark or copyright, I think that would need to be shown from reliable sources if we were to ever consider adding it to the article. Even Dave Winer's copyright of the RSS 2.0 spec (the one now at Harvard) seems a bit fishy. Was he the only writer on that

3665:

RSS does not lack an owner. Netscape created and named the protocol, and thus has the trademark rights and copyright associated with the format. It's more accurate to say that the absence of Netscape from active participation in RSS development left a vacuum that has made all future development of

3448:

article. The citation you have proposed looks like a personal blog, it has no references, and it doesn't appear to have any information about the RSS definition or history that exceeds what is already in the Knowledge article. In the past people have constantly tried to add external links to this

3278:

I'm not suggesting we should have an instruction manual, but we should have about as much text from the administrator point of view as we have from the client point of view under the Usage-header, which isn't much either. The current Usage chapter can hardly be classified as an instruction manual,

1543:

I believe you have vandalized the article for personal reasons. "We dont need to teach people" you say. But people need to be teached. People don't understand anything to this format full of angle brackets, and the specification is not sufficient to understand what is RSS. The guidelines are clear

1312:

It seems that the image is about to be speedy-deleted from Commons because of copyright issues. If anyone wants to save it, they would need to negotiate with the person who nominated it, or substitute a screenshot from a FOSS RSS reader. I personally don't object to the inclusion of the screenshot

757:

The article body makes it amply clear that, in the years since its initial meaning of "RDF Site Summary," "RSS" has been given several different meanings. The article summary gives the current meaning, "Really Simple Syndication" based on the currently most-used RSS dialect, RSS 2.0. This article

628:

I suppose caching in a database is the best way, but the best solution for programming newbies who don't have the time to learn PHP is just a simple step-by-step solution that allows us to get a feed displayed, then shows how to control the various options. In the long run this would help a lot of

3720:

Then I decided to look at the RSS page to see if it linked to the RSS 2.0 spec. It didn't, so I added a link. I haven't been back to see if that has been reverted. BTW, most of that page is worthless, things that never happened, Rove-like spin from god knows who. That's the thing about Knowledge,

789:

The RSS 0.91 specification that is linked from the article says 'Files must be 100% valid XML'. It also describes RSS as a syndication format. If editors felt strongly that the article was misnamed, I suppose it could be called 'RSS (syndication format)', but I don't see the urgency. I think the

693:

Does anyone find the new section on future versions pointless (and almost incoherent)? And I question the need for a whole new example to illustrate "icon misuse". It seems that the main point could be incoporated into the history section and that whole passage deleted. I thought I would ask here

612:

The problem is how to display RSS feeds on your website, particularly PHP which seems to be the most common way. This issue is not addressed enough on the web and seems to be a gaping hole. For programmers who know PHP, probably not an issue, but what about the rest of us who can barely get by in

251:

specifically for those in the medical sector - why doctors should be using RSS, how it can benefit them and act as a tool to further medical research. Even though that is probably not your area, it should give you some ideas as to the potential benefits of RSS, the same prinicples of which can be

4001:

article that claims that it is an 'emerging standard,' and it shows that Yahoo and Google provide some support for any RSS feeds that might use it, the article contains no third party references that show any widespread use of GeoRSS in published RSS freeds. There is no assertion that the GeoRSS

3217:

article, discussing the benefit to the user of the various innovations, with no attempt to minutely assign credit, but perhaps using the same amount of space as now. Also what about the engineering tradeoffs that were made along the way. E.g. what motivated the choice of XML for the format? The

1693:

if you think their use of external links could be improved. I wouldn't draw any conclusions from your seeing links to tutorials over at CSS as implying that such links should also be added here. If anything, WP:EL appears to say that links to tutorials are not needed. If the WP article itself is

1673:

Perhaps Wikiuniversity is more suited to tutorials for their content but we are speaking of external links. Apparently tutorials are things to link on the CSS article, but not on the RSS article? I don't agree because CSS has a W3C specification that is easier to read than the RSS one. About the

1362:

There is still stuff here from 2005, and there are comments about issues that are long gone. Does anyone object if I move old comments to an archive page? I would like to delete all the unsigned comments; they can be recovered from the page history if needed. I would not move any active threads.

4045:

It just seems sprawling, includes events that may have little to no long-term historical significance (WP:NOT), has completely unnecessary external links within the text (WP:LINKS), etc. That's why I just put a general cleanup tag. I don't know how many times I have added cleanup tags or simply

3323:

The present article is mostly for those who are technically-minded, since it presents RSS from a computer science point of view. As you will see in the comments just above, the type of resource you are proposing to add is found by the millions in any Google search, so it is not a service to our

3261:. There is also no burning need in this case. If you Google for 'creating RSS' you will get 98.7 million hits, so the information should be easy to find elsewhere. I agree with your point about the bloated examples we use. Do you have a suggestion for improvement? Don't forget to look at the 1532:

I agree with Ed because it seems to me the latest edits are not encyclopedic, we dont need to teach people how to read or write RSS and I removed the refs section following our spam guidelines. While I might have left the rerst myself Ed has asked for opinions and this is mine (based on 2 years

902:

A spam link that I removed from 'Other articles' last week has just come back (freshthinkingbusiness.com). It seems to me that a section as vaguely named as 'Other articles' will be an irresistible draw for bad links. If there were support for eliminating that section I'd try to rewrite all the

215:

but it fails, quite seriously, to describe what it is like to live with and use RSS, what you do, what it does, and why it's so good. At the moment it is still inward-looking towards nerddom and needs to consider what it means, looks, feels, smells and tastes like to the average non-nerd in the

3920:

Some of this recent activity may be due to the fact that I removed the entire (apparently "new") "Editors" section earlier today. It was rapidly growing into a list of random "I can advertise my software here!" links. In theory, I don't mind a mention of these tools and one or two prominent

1178:

A directory of links useful for finding an RSS feed reader for a chosen operating system (instead of linking various seperate readers). No, I am not affiliated, I merely came across this site on Yahoo Answers and thought it would be a very useful resource for anyone looking for a feed reader.

624:

1. Show how to call (or include) the XML feed 2. Show sample code on how to parse the XML file, where this code is supposed to be put, and can it be kept in a separate file 3. Show us the basic code for options we have to do the following things: headlines only, headlines with description,

3088:

I removed Genres as well as famous people. I removed generes based on the above disscussions, I removed famous people because many of them were not primerily known as podcasters, and the section took up a lot of room. I think the new version will work, so please leave some feedback.

1217:. The RSS Compendium is supposed to help you choose a feed reader, and it must be reasonably popular because it gets 19,700 Google hits. By comparison, rssformat.com gets only 252 Google hits. At present, rssformat.com does not seem to fill a need better than the many alternatives. 1580:

Here is your error. These instructions are related to ARTICLES, and you are applying to external links what should be applied to the content of Knowledge itself. The guidelines say that we have to link to material that doesn't fit in the Knowledge itself. Knowledge is intended to

373:

I just had the same idea of having an RSS feed of my watchlist. It would be a very nice idea to follow up on violators and act quickly to revert those violations. Is it allowed to have a script that downloads my watchlist on the hour to transform that into my very own rss feed?

1568:

While Knowledge has descriptions of people, places, and things, Knowledge articles should not include instructions or advice (legal, medical, or otherwise), suggestions, or contain "how-to"s. This includes tutorials, walk-throughs, instruction manuals, video game guides, and

3279:

right? Actually I think the article is currently violating the "Knowledge is not an indiscriminate collection of information" rule that you linked to by completely neglecting the RSS administrator point of view and only discussing the subject from the end user point of view.

223:

which i found to be very informative: "This tutorial explains the features and benefits of a Web format called RSS, and gives a brief technical overview of it." maybe someone could get some ideas of how to make the wiki article more interesting by looking through this.

3962: 3953:)be included in the article? I realize that the Mozilla feed icon has replaced these symbols in many situations, but these were the original icons maintained, they are still plentiful out there, and they would add to the comprehensive nature of the article. 1726:

Please, take note the answers I have posted are as short as possible. Here is the question: Does the RSS article needs for a short Tutorial section in external links (as CSS has) or not. And as you, I'll be pleased if other contributors can give an advice.

1820:

Does this format have any civilian end-users? It seems to be heavily protected, coprighted, and limited by agreements, so I wonder how much it will go into general use. And why is it being offered while RSS is already there. Do they consider RSS too open?

621:

figure out. I've been to various feed-this feed-that sites, downloaded, implemented, tested, etc etc ---ALL TO NO AVAIL! (and I already run PHP pages on my site) Can anybody out there do a step-by-step write-up with sample PHP code showing the following:

1847:

Since the article has a history section, external links to RSS history either are used to prove the validity of the article, or are useless. My opinion is the two history links are references and should be moved in this section. Different advices?

828: 268:

searching for it." Seems to be a dig at the "old media" on the part of a member of "the new media." Also, the second sentence seems far too much a plug. Not very encyclopedic... We are to inform, not to advocate. - 207.166.7.200, March 4, 2006.

1421:

By removing tutorials, you are wrong. Tutorial is the kind of link we have to add to the article. You should look at the body of the article itself that is full of external links and I believe there is some spams here we should carefully study.

3666:

the format highly contentious, with different groups including UserLand Software, Harvard, the RSS Advisory Board and RSS-DEV Working Group each claiming the right to publish successive versions that sprang from either RSS 0.90 or RSS 0.91.

3798:

Thanks for your draft comment about namespaces. I changed the article so it now links to both versions of the spec, and it now contains most of your two sentences. If can see any other possible improvements to the article text let us know.

1738:

Sorry, I hoped you'd find my argument (given above) against the Tutorial section convincing, based on WP:EL's complete lack of interest in tutorials. What CSS does is their business. You'll have to wait for others to answer your question.

3686:

document? Wasn't it the result of an informal collaboration? Did the other participants assign their copyrights to him? Didn't he reuse any text from older specs? Similar questions might be asked about any possible Netscape copyright.

1079:

Found an interesting article that I think would add to the topic. It's a beginners guide, and is well written and geared towards a non-technical audience. It's not a how-to for producing feeds, but focuses on how to use RSS yourself etc.

2220:

Note: I did not make the template, and agree it can be smaller. Personally I don't think size is that big of a deal, but anyway, I will agree that genres can go. i also added the template on several other page. I will state that I

4046:

removed history sections (those with actually no historical content to speak of) of internet technology articles (especially articles about recent companies in the business with such sections).--Boffob 22:03, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

3835: 3213:. The history that remains here currently is (I think) approximately the right amount of material, but it is choppy reading, and it's more like a blow-by-blow than a real historical summary. I'd favor a higher-level overview in the 1607:

Actually I am quoting WP:EL, that I had pointed out above. My proposal is to restore the tutorial section before to continue this discussion unlike you can provide precise rules to remove them. Note that if we remove tutorials from

1707:

is more of a computer science article. Perhaps you could find some article published in a print journal that discusses a connection between RSS and social networking. If there is such an article, it might be reasonable to cite

3497: 3420:, ie all material should be sourced from a reliable source. I dont actually know if your questions are answerable, lots of sites make up RSS feeds and they do say in individual ways for the most part from what I can see, 4020:

I think it would make much more sense if the two examples of the RSS feeds had the same content them, but in different formats (1.00 and 2.00, respectively). It would better show the differences between the two formats.

3818:

Not sure what the bottom line was in the on-line conversation (difference or no difference) but in any event I took out the reference to your posting. Have you been able to determine whether the two specs are the same?

1808:

I do not know much about the topic but it seems to me that NewsML maybe is more for the professional market (b2b) while RSS perhaps is targeted more at individuals. Maybe it does not make sense to compare the two at

3112:

create the template and was wondering why it was changed, but can see your points. However, I created it based on the fact that those categories and incomplete issues were to be fixed with the aggressiveness of the

1795:

I'm missing references to NewsML which is a format used by the major news organisations for distributing news. NewsML is adopted by the IPTC (International Press Telecommunications Council) while I do not think RSS

949:

Are you referring just to the section called 'Modules'? I saw that being added, and I wondered if it was legit, but I think that RSS namespaces are important. Do you know enough about modules to improve this part?

1345:

there. The page should be altered to reflect that RSS no longer just syndicates "frequently updated pages, such as blogs or news feeds", but also publishes audio and video content, such as podcasts and vidcasts.

420:

RSS is very exciting; I will contribute here if I can. I was wondering, though, where would be a good place to make suggestions here? It would be incredible if watchlists could be made into RSS feeds! -lydgate

3968:

And then download the whole RSS feed data if my client notices that the hash has changed for that particular feed? I could not find any mention of this possibility neither in the article nor in this talk page.

837:. However, it's important that users coming to this page find out what RSS is, and for most people, that means learning what web feeds are in general. Should it be left up to the user to think to follow the 1117:

This is a very minor part, but I believe it should be edited. If you hover your mouse over the big feed icon, it says the icons is in IE 7 and Firefox. Shouldn't Opera be included (it is adapted in Opera)?

365:

Of course one could always set up a much smaller watchlist on a dormant sock account. The more I think about it the more I like it, though it might make edit wars more fraught than they often already are,

2072: 2000: 1553:

EdJohnston has moved previously a comparison of formats from this tutorials section, to specifications, and I believe he is wrong. The article is not an official specification, it is really a tutorial.

1635:

the world 'tutorial' does not occur in the main text, and it gives no explicit support for your desire to link to 'tutors, demonstrations, source code, and so on.' Other Wikimedia projects such as

758:

has, unfortunately, been vandalized in the past by unregistered editors -- that's why it is locked. Anyone who spends the five minutes required to register as a Knowledge editor can indeed edit it.

3911:

article deleted. It puzzles me exactly what these things would be used for. Who wants to bother creating an RSS feed manually? It might be worth getting an explanation of what the actual need is.

443:

Guys, as others above have tried to suggest, this is a great place to make suggestions if you want to ensure that they never get implemented. On the other hand, if you want someone to listen, try

2044: 2052: 790:

Talk discussion about RSS being a protocol must be ancient history from 2005; not much point in responding to that since the word 'protocol' is not used to refer to RSS in the current article.

3978:

This is an intrinsic feature of HTTP called ETags (see RFC2616 section 3.11). Not all servers and clients support it, mind you, but the option is available if they care about bandwidth usage.

1026:

I'd recommend against. The page has, in my opinion, objectional amounts of advertising. Further, how-to related information is not a focus of this project. Thanks for asking! ;) See also,

2016: 561:

This version became known as RSS 0.9. It was basically a clone of Channel Definition Format, with a few key differences: it wasn't published by a Microsoft employee, so it wasa a lot better.

200:

Can someone please add a section that explains why RSS is interesting? While the technical details are helpful in understanding the "how," non-techies may want to know the why first. Thanks,

1015:, but saw that I should bring it up here first. W3 Schools (of which I'm only a fan, not affiliated) has a really great introduction/tutorial about RSS. Would it be okay if I added that? 3183:

The detailed early history of who invented what web syndication format element when has become a matter of interest and dispute. The same kind of problems cropping up in the article about

2020: 1996: 3907:

article that such programs exist, and perhaps give an example of one of them that's been externally reviewed, to illustrate the genre. If that were done I'd be happy to see the separate

3950: 3712:

on his Scripting News blog. There has also been some discussion lately on various blogs as to what the difference is between the two warring specs. (Apparently not much; one comment is

2048: 856: 287:

I also think that we need to expand on Atom related info as well. for semi-techie users such as myself, the tussle between Atom and RSS 'specifications' is of historical significance (

2012: 1483:

has a helpful site to tell you how RSS works, and usually to sell a bunch of stuff as well. If I'm the only one trying to keep this stuff out, I will turn the floor over to others.

1664:

and you may notice that none of the external links included in the former Tutorials and References section were cited in the text, so they lacked even this amount of justification.

4049:

I tried my best to clean it up and focus on the timeline of the RSS 0.90/1.0 branch and the 0.91/2.0 branch, along with a mention of how Atom fits in. As part of this, I think the

1658:

If you link to another website, you should give your reader a good summary of the site's contents, and the reasons why this specific website is relevant to the article in question.

866: 3930: 3865: 1227: 1050:

I second the motion. The front page of W3 Schools seems to be more than 80% advertising. The factual material is offered in paragraph-size chunks, all surrounded by further ads.

3579: 3716:). Certainly our policies allow Dave Winer or any other person who might be covered by an article to comment on the Talk page, so this comment (April 30) seems a little harsh: 1984: 966:

that will parse basic RSS info into a table. Would that be an acceptable link to place here? The reader is free, and I am not a commercial site (nor do I host advertising).

884:, and Category:Blog search engines. Just as an example of why such lists don't belong here--somebody just created a list with only two "RSS search engines" on it, one of them 805:

The test reads "In August 2005, Israeli student Jonathan Avidan unilaterally launched a project to create "RSS 3". It failed to gain backing from anyone in the RSS industry."

3972: 1713:

If this discussion is to continue further, it should be moved to one of our talk pages, because some editors will tire of extremely long discussions on an article Talk page.

2024: 1748:

Not convincing since WP:EL is of general use while tutorials are useful only in technologies. Topics require different kinds of external links and they can't be all listed.

2076: 1992: 1988: 1313:

but I'd like to know the exact instructions for making it. E.g. I was not aware that out-of-the-box Thunderbird could do feed-reading, so there must be a plugin involved.

897: 3899:

Other people seem to have restored the separate article. I don't like the kind of list that includes every product of a certain kind that is on the market, which is what

3774:

If you believe there's a significant difference, and if you could compose a sentence or two summarizing the differences, maybe a comment should be added to the article.

3734:

I'm the chairman of the RSS Advisory Board. The RSS 2.0 spec link on the External Links section is significantly out of date. The current version, updated most recently

2040: 1544:

about that (see the link above). We have to link content that can't fit in the article. There is no good reason to remove the tutorial section (or the see also section).

3875:

I've merged a list of editors, which were on a separate page, but none of them seem notable; leastways not notable enough to have their own article. Do wee need them?

2068: 2008: 312: 3178: 1450: 2060: 1289: 652:

I know that this seems like nitpicking, but in the second line "RSS is used by (among other things) news websites," don't you think "news websites" should like to

1557:

I believe we have to restore the section to take more advices from other users, as they can't judge properly the validity of the links if the links are not here.

1074: 1980: 746: 735:

RSS stands for Rich Site Summary, not "Really Simple Summary." But now that some moron has locked the article, I guess millions of people will be misinformed.

3517: 2251:

I have re-created the template, because it is a good idea...but I agree a lot included in the original version was unnecessary. Here's what it now looks like:

3957: 1189: 228: 1811: 1240: 1468:

Social network is heavily based on RSS feeds and so, the connection is more than evident. But if you like to remove the link, this is not a real problem.

4022: 3117:

members. Maybe, in time - the usefulness of the genres, especially will be valued as those categories grow. Thanks for taking the time to fix it Ganfon.

2182: 1397: 1097: 603: 174: 3199: 3708:

article, to replace the link to the Cadenhead version of the RSS 2.0 spec with the one hosted at Harvard that he favors. He commented on the situation

3369: 3315: 1477: 1339: 863: 501: 1650:

article is under heavy spam pressure, in the last few months the editors have been quite vigilant about keeping out new links. WP:EL does provide that

876:

I'm removing these two lists from this article--there's no need to (partially) duplicate here information that much more fully available elsewhere:

780: 1396:

after browsing digg.com. Definately a worthwhile resource for someone looking for the interworkings of RSS and an all in one RSS directory/reader.

1685:

I would prefer not to be the only editor responding to your questions, because many people have an interest in this page. However, with respect to

566: 1306: 907: 3979: 3810: 1062: 1018: 522: 273: 138:

here. What to do about this? I don't know, because I don't know who to contact to report stuff like this. Emailing first author of article. --

3765:

of the RSS Advisory Board.' How would you be able to show that this is the world standard for the RSS spec? What about Dave Winer's copyright?

1943: 1093: 151:

the mess that is now RSS came into existence. Finally i added some cross references to help people get more information. Hope this is helpful,

117:

It isn't a file format, either. The file format is XML. RSS is an XML dialect. This is stated explicitly in the official RSS 2.0 specification

1935: 1857: 1487: 1352: 660:? I realise that it would mean changing the link to direct to a stub, but I still think it's for informative than the current choice of link 497: 152: 3893: 1537: 1512: 633: 3969: 3858:, where "xml" could be some other programming/markup language of the many supported by the GeSHi extension. Ramir 09:25, 31 May 2007 (UTC) 917:

Editors regularly clean out undiscussed links from this article. Please discuss here if you want a link not to be cleaned out regularly.

767: 4086:

Per the discussion here, the Atom section has been removed. I think Atom's adequately covered in the history section and on its own page.

3354: 3222: 1209:, as the name suggests. Helping people choose a feed reader does not have much to do with the file format, but might be considered on the 822: 3651: 3424: 3408: 1825: 1410: 4100: 4090: 4081: 4057: 3690: 3381: 3328: 2652: 1842: 661: 1381: 1250: 1105: 892: 808:

If it's a one-man project from a non-notable individual that appears to have failed to gain any note, why do we bother mentioning it?

794: 513: 3590: 3430: 2276: 1743: 1717: 1668: 1317: 231: 3823: 3813: 3662:

The article currently states of RSS that "Effectively, this left the format without an owner, just as it was becoming widely used."

3457: 3318: 3314:. By submitting a URL, an RSS 2.0 feed is automatically generated and updated for you. This could be included under External Links? 1612:

for example, this will leave the article with zero external links (but ODP), and external links **are** required by the guidelines.

1571:

If you Google for 'rss tutorial' you will get 54.2 million hits, so there are many options available for people seeking a tutorial.

1281: 954: 940: 3303: 3269: 2215: 1869: 1834: 1782: 1731: 1678: 1616: 1602: 1593: 1575: 1502: 395: 4039: 3921:

example. In practice, however, it rarely works out that way without constant babysitting to remove the inevitable link spam. --

3803: 3793: 3785:

different position today on all of this, but as someone he asked to join the board in 2004 and a member ever since, I think he's

3750: 3507: 3396: 2028: 1852: 1814: 1561: 1526: 1185: 985: 871: 427:

Suggestion: it would be neat if Knowledge had a feed that, each day, linked to the top 5 searched-for articles the previous day.

354:

An interesting idea, but with 2,800+ articles watched personally it would be hopelessly impractical. Suggest it somewhere at the

173:

Why no mention of RSS extensions for IE under "Usage?" That is really not helpful to someone trying to find that in particular.

1054: 671: 529: 4030: 2242: 2204: 1589:. But articles are not sufficient to explain, we need for external links to tutors, demonstrations, source code and so ones... 647: 195: 3146: 3135:

Coincedently, the template I created was no bigger than any other table template I've seen on Knowledge. Such as {{Vitamins}}.

3128: 1772: 1348:

With this in mind, I've added a link to a very hard to find specification for the iTunes specification for podcast RSS feeds.

1001: 546: 412: 4066: 3210: 3192: 2314: 1197: 783: 589: 436:

I think a more instantly useful RSS would be 'did you know...?' entries/current events/featured articles from the front page.

724: 598: 476: 3778: 3728: 3491: 3400: 3386:

Usually when I know very little about a subject, I come to Knowledge for a good overview. This article was disappointing.

3102: 1906: 1874: 688: 3848: 750: 706: 639:

Knowledge is not a programming tutorial, and if it were, information on parsing XML documents would best be suited in the

315:

was a web directory so I have added it here. It is good work, well done and well worth it, and is similar to the EL's at

4025: 4010: 3346: 2376: 1790: 1495: 1454: 1446: 3670: 574:

This has been fixed (as at beginning 2006). It helps if you date comments like this which I think got left July 2005? --

3941:

Forgive me if I've missed any discussion on this here or in the archive, but shouldn't the two aforementioned images (

3310:

I feel there should be a link to a tool that can create RSS feeds for those who aren't technically minded, for example

1879:

Do we want to keep the gigantic template that is added at the bottom of the article by the {{Podcasting}} template?

773: 3809:

is particularly relevant here - it was just a misunderstanding. Sam was referring to a different document altogether.

3633: 862:

bad practice to make encyclopedia articles too esoteric when an extra sentence or two can greatly clarify a subject.--

848:

I've handled the intro, but I think the rest of the page should be edited to put web feed info not specific to RSS in

581: 378: 1830:

I believe that the normal way should be to write an article to this format, as we have to link to RSS websites here.

1426: 1367: 1143: 930: 742: 472:

And Atom-enabled too! Note that you have to go to the article's History page in order to find this feature, though.

565:

Sounds to me like a dig at Microsoft. Doesn't seem very NPOV or encylopedic to me. What does everyone else think? -

79:

Hmm, I would call RSS (of whatever version) a file format, a document type, or an object model, but not a protocol.

4096:

suppose it's not a burning question. Our article suggests that Atom was developed because the RSS spec was frozen.

3935: 3771:

for a recent blog post claiming that there is little difference between the RSS Board spec and Dave Winer's spec.

3696: 3463: 3114: 1863: 1472: 552: 463: 1400: 833:

I heavily redid the RSS intro a month ago to better explain web feeds, but now I realize that should all go under

812: 3963:

Article does not mention hashing in RSS protocol. Does RSS support hashing to minimize amount of transfered data?

3786: 3376: 3191:. This seems like a possible solution here, so I moved (essentially copied) historical text from this article to 3169: 2657: 1865:, copyright 2006 BetaNews, Inc. If anyone wants to rewrite the section in their own words, they are welcome to. 1374: 970: 1221: 681:

I do not know what RSS feeds are. I feel that the article should include a simpler summary or maybe examples. --

336: 3985: 2942: 2598: 1416: 1045: 730: 347:

Anyone know of plans for Knowledge to support RSS? I would love to be able to access my watchlist via RSS. --

3768:

Perhaps you might have an opinion whether this question should make much difference to Knowledge readers. See

3257:

Although this article can certainly be improved, we are told that Knowledge is not an instruction manual. See

1760: 1333: 1136:

using a variant on the RSS logo? I spotted it on one of their vehicles today and thought it was a bit wrong.

276: 3879: 3251: 2269: 2004: 1939: 1689:, I have never edited there, so I don't know how those editors prefer to do things. Raise the issue over at 1101: 342: 3173: 4015: 3657: 3603: 2662: 2064: 1463: 1168: 997: 505: 3915: 2647: 2036: 1690: 1646:

It's up to the editors of each article to decide on the external links they think appropriate. Since the

1431: 134:

68.14.170.144 Said they were confused about the article, swore, and was sarcastic. 210.187.3.130 posted

3480: 841:

link for more explanation? I'm thinking of putting a note to users that they probably will want to read

3925: 2524: 1357: 1122: 921: 912: 38: 3298: 3246: 3844: 3735: 3709: 3701: 3677: 2911: 1260:

I should have examined the links better before adding the tag, most of them are ok. I would remove:

3608: 3404: 3363: 2262: 2056: 1899: 1406:

Adding yet another directory of feeds does not seem relevant to explaining the RSS *file format*.

1193: 1164: 763: 487: 3350: 2742: 2032: 1959: 1927: 800: 88: 1766: 288: 1686: 1609: 1156: 877: 448: 444: 405: 355: 3393:

Instead, this article has a lot of history and arcana that I just don't care about right now.

3265:

article, which is a bit more practical than this one; this one is more like computer science.

1862:

The material I removed is found word-for-word in a 22 December 2006 article by Ed Oswald, at

470: 3417: 3228: 3205:

Having a separate article is a good idea. I agree with your recent removal of stuff from the

3188: 2304: 2166: 1494:

to know the RSS file format and that can't fit in the article, and this is conformant to the

1387: 1263:

The RSS History (Dmitry Baranov) link, since the linked page contains just a short paragraph.

1173: 1147: 307: 262: 3769: 3713: 3161:'s authorship. (sorry for not posting this before, I got distracted after adding the tag) -- 2196:

On my screen it adds 2.8 inches to the length of the page. This template was added today by

936:

About modules. This is a bunch of links both in the article and references. Is this useful?

525:". I don't think there are much useful information, but feel free to merge it, if needed. -- 481: 3342: 3047: 2346: 1442: 1139: 1089: 1084: 853: 738: 493: 84: 74: 8: 3196: 3166: 2979: 2974: 2899: 2578: 2299: 2141: 1892: 1160: 889: 819: 759: 473: 469:

I don't know when this happened, but apparently Knowledge articles are now RSS-enabled!

3721:

it's a free-for-all slamfest, and you don't have a right to confront your accusers. Feh

3954: 3890: 3876: 3630: 3597:

section? I have removed this as it seems pointless if you can't read anymore about it.

3513: 3449:

article, so we are reluctant to add something that is not a clearcut improvement. See

3158: 3152: 3072: 2894: 2718: 2698: 2411: 2366: 2341: 2186: 1330: 1276: 66: 3931: 3836:

New gimmick has been added to the article for syntax highlighting in the RSS examples

3545: 3292: 3240: 2962: 2957: 2871: 2820: 2545: 1704: 1647: 1437: 201: 139: 110:. I've moved the page, and removed the last mention of protocol in the article text. 1804: 818:

I agree--also the source cited doesn't meet Knowledge's standard. So I took it out.

594:

I'm starting a new website and I'm wondering if I should use RSS. How do I do it? --

4087: 4062: 4054: 3742:. Our position, as the publisher of the spec since 2003, is that people should use 3667: 3617:

Effectively, this the format without an owner, just as it was becoming widely used.

3600: 3258: 3144: 3126: 3096: 2967: 2747: 2236: 2125: 2113: 1519: 1323: 993: 903:

useful material found there and incorporate it in the regular text of the article.

129: 4097: 4078: 4036: 4007: 3912: 3870: 3862: 3820: 3800: 3775: 3757: 3725: 3687: 3648: 3625:

Pitifully, this dog without an owner, just as it was becoming widely appreciated.

3584: 3576: 3488: 3454: 3325: 3266: 3219: 3062: 3016: 2952: 2947: 2835: 2677: 2504: 2478: 2285: 2201: 2174: 1866: 1822: 1740: 1714: 1665: 1599: 1598:

If you believe you are quoting an official Knowledge policy, please point to it.

1572: 1484: 1407: 1378: 1364: 1349: 1314: 1247: 1237: 1218: 1119: 1051: 951: 927: 904: 881: 829:

Make this specific to RSS; move all generic 'web feed' info to 'web feed' article

809: 791: 716: 698: 578: 455: 333: 328: 184: 4035:

On my User Talk, Boffob left this comment about his reason for the Cleanup tag.

46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

3421: 3162: 3042: 2805: 2708: 2351: 2324: 1534: 1509: 1300: 1213:

page. However that page already has a link to the 'RSS Compendium', located at

1042: 682: 668: 629:

people get more familiar with programming. I welcome commentary. Thanks a lot.

543: 518: 367: 359: 320: 408:. Please, go there and add a note in favor and what you'd like in the feed. 327:

That list does not belong on this page, so I've reverted edits to both pages.

3373: 3067: 3057: 3052: 3011: 2984: 2926: 2879: 2830: 2757: 2555: 2431: 2386: 2109: 2105: 1951: 1294:

Well is it? It doesn't really add too the article, which talks about the RSS

1271: 1233: 1159:

the icon image was released for general usage by everyone that supports RSS.

1031: 937: 630: 526: 392: 375: 348: 3743: 3739: 2560: 2426: 1754: 1703:

has a connection to social networking which it is our business to document.

1436:

Here is an interesting paper describing risks of using RSS and Atom feeds.

3922: 3450: 3287: 3235: 2906: 2884: 2825: 2772: 2672: 2593: 2436: 2381: 2371: 2212: 2129: 2101: 2097: 1632: 1112: 1027: 779:

the file format is plain text. furthermore, RSS 0.91 doesn't even use XML

168: 3949: 963: 3390:

which were seen before? Are these even the right questions to be asking?

3136: 3118: 3091: 3037: 2762: 2441: 2421: 2391: 2356: 2231: 2197: 2121: 2117: 1955: 1849: 1831: 1779: 1728: 1675: 1640: 1613: 1590: 1558: 1523: 1499: 1469: 1423: 989: 967: 595: 301: 92: 83:

Don't know much about this area, but I too have doubts about RSS being a

118: 3908: 3900: 3886: 3840: 3790: 3747: 3282:

As for the examples, I'd remove the RSS 1.0 one and remove all but one

3184: 2889: 2845: 2792: 2767: 2752: 2667: 2550: 2514: 2473: 2162: 2158: 2137: 2133: 2093: 1963: 1947: 979: 885: 609:

the web, but everywhere I go this is the only information I can find.

575: 389: 316: 3502:

article is said to be ranked #4 in Google among all Knowledge articles

888:, a blog search engine that does not rely on RSS search for its data. 676: 385: 3525: 3286:

s from the second one. Then all the tags left should be described. --

3262: 3157:

None of the citations in the section "RSS Creation" appear to verify

3021: 3004: 2840: 2815: 2777: 2626: 2588: 2583: 2529: 2499: 2416: 1636: 1210: 1038: 539: 409: 4006:

article to link to it. Please comment if you have opinions on this.

404:

Attempting to gather conversation and support for implementation at

252:

applied to many different industry sectors. 23:57, 18 February 2006

220: 145: 3483:

for reasons why this type of link would not be appropriate for the

3436: 2999: 2916: 2850: 2782: 2603: 2570: 2509: 2494: 2406: 2336: 2309: 1931: 1214: 849: 842: 838: 834: 135: 111: 47: 17: 3218:

present article makes the final RSS format chosen seem arbitrary.

2254: 1266:

The GeoRSS link, since there is no reference to it in the article.

1128: 643:

entry, not the RSS entry. Maybe you should just hire a programmer.

3903:

constitutes. I think it's more reasonable to mention here in the

3746:

when linking to the spec, not older versions archived elsewhere.

3555: 3535: 3187:

were largely solved when somebody created a separate article for

2989: 2810: 2787: 2519: 2446: 2401: 2361: 1886: 625:

background/text/link color control, number of items in the feed.

291:), especially with most sites starting for offer both the feeds. 3472: 1699:

With regard to social networking, I still don't see why the RSS

667:

Please don't link to stubs, this is a lost of time for readers.

3998: 3994: 3986: 3570: 2994: 2703: 2631: 2621: 1133:

Is there any copyright infringment being made by this company:

3565: 3560: 3468:

You can convert your RSS / PodCast to PHP, and Javascript.

3439:. Short essay on the mass media; its history and development. 2396: 1805:

Some very few notes I've found that "compares" NewsML and RSS

3997:

from the See Also section of this article. While there is a

1157:

http://blogs.msdn.com/rssteam/archive/2005/12/14/503778.aspx

1012: 237: 3943: 3761: 3550: 2921: 2713: 2693: 1393: 1134: 107: 103: 3473:

RSSConverters RSS2JS, RSS2PHP, PodCast2PHP, and PodCast2JS

3311: 295: 4070: 4003: 3904: 3705: 3540: 3499: 3484: 3445: 3214: 3206: 2613: 2178: 2170: 640: 219:

I just added a link at the bottom of the article page to

1800: 1228:

Proposal to remove two more links and undo the EL banner

1205:

The present article is the place for explaining the RSS

158: 4073:

article. In any case I support his suggestion that the

978:

There is an article for readers. The right place is at

653: 557:

I'm uncomfortable with this sentance under "History":

1643:

might be more appropriate for this type of material.

3849:

User_talk:EdJohnston#XML_syntax_highlighting_on_RSS

289:

Article: (Guardian.com) RSS and Atom peace proposal

4074: 4050: 3738:to clarify namespace support in RSS, is published 1778:and so one. I can't be wrong or we are all wrong! 1438:http://www.cgisecurity.com/papers/HackingFeeds.pdf 282: 216:street. :) Love from A Grouchy Anonymous Old Git. 3856:just tag the code with <source lang="xml": --> 3179:Move detailed early history to a separate article 657: 3704:must be the one in which Dave Winer changed our 1373:Since no-one objected, I went ahead and created 1290:Thunderbird Screenshot - is it really necessary? 1129:http://en.wikipedia.org/Image_talk:Feed-icon.svg 3680:of the lead paragraph. It seems more clear now! 898:Replace 'Other articles' section with new text? 1329:Add RSS to My Watchlist Special Page (please) 3530: 2270: 1900: 2229:a replacment/ re-done template is completed. 2156: 2091: 1978: 1925: 1518:My answer to SqueakBox has been moved to my 1881: 1769:- The same link that has been removed here. 845:. Anyone aware of standard practice here? 604:RSS Aggregator/Parsing Information Anybody? 3339:Yeah, I agree to EdJohnston's remarks. ] 2277: 2263: 1907: 1893: 1478:Plan to revert back to 27 December version 1340:Completely missing any mention of podcasts 4069:. A shorter version could be left in the 3744:http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification 236:I've also added a link that may help you 3453:for Knowledge policy on external links. 521:has created a stupid duplicate article " 102:It isn't a protocol. It's all done over 14: 3193:History of web syndication technology‎ 1182:Would this not make a valid addition? 1075:External Link - A well written article 694:instead of editing, though. Thoughts? 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 4067:History of web syndication technology 3444:I don't see that this belongs in the 3211:History of web syndication technology 2258: 119:http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss 4053:is redundant and should be removed. 3593:when the page does not exist in the 1751:Some examples or RSS related topics: 654:http://en.wikipedia.org/News_website 25: 3589:Why do we have an internal link to 2284: 535:appended to article, needs cleanup 106:. If RSS is a protocol, then so is 23: 3756:Thank for for participating here. 3481:WP:EL#Links normally to be avoided 3382:Agree: Article is a Dissapointment 1843:Moving history links to references 24: 4120: 3936:Image:XML feed button example.png 3431:Add New External Link to an Essay 1522:by him, If you are interested... 3948: 3942: 3845:his recent change to the article 3115:Knowledge:WikiProject Podcasting 1858:Copyvio removed: 'Patent Issues' 1508:I will support you in this, Ed, 1232:I copied here a discussion from 1215:http://allrss.com/rssreaders.com 29: 3760:is working its way through the 3521:top ten articles in Knowledge: 3512:by an anonymous contributor on 2149: 2084: 1971: 1918: 1375:Talk:RSS (file format)/Archive1 872:Aggregators, RSS search engines 658:http://en.wikipedia.org/Website 4031:Cleanup tag on History section 3479:Thanks for your note, but see 1455:14:30, 17 September 2007 (UTC) 1150:) 05:48, August 29, 2007 (UTC) 1085:A Beginners Guide to Using RSS 857:01:28, 17 September 2006 (UTC) 648:Suggestions For Specific Edits 232:15:20, 19 September 2005 (UTC) 196:laymen need more info! Really! 13: 1: 4082:17:16, 4 September 2007 (UTC) 4058:17:06, 4 September 2007 (UTC) 4040:17:31, 3 September 2007 (UTC) 3843:provided this explanation of 3304:20:13, 28 February 2007 (UTC) 3270:18:45, 28 February 2007 (UTC) 3252:16:31, 28 February 2007 (UTC) 3223:17:09, 16 February 2007 (UTC) 3200:14:37, 16 February 2007 (UTC) 1538:16:49, 31 December 2006 (UTC) 1527:16:43, 31 December 2006 (UTC) 1513:16:14, 31 December 2006 (UTC) 1503:15:59, 31 December 2006 (UTC) 1488:20:06, 30 December 2006 (UTC) 1473:10:00, 30 December 2006 (UTC) 1427:09:41, 30 December 2006 (UTC) 1411:14:22, 29 December 2006 (UTC) 1401:01:29, 29 December 2006 (UTC) 1382:03:05, 20 December 2006 (UTC) 1368:22:44, 17 December 2006 (UTC) 1353:17:54, 12 December 2006 (UTC) 1318:03:33, 25 November 2006 (UTC) 1307:22:29, 24 November 2006 (UTC) 1282:08:26, 17 November 2006 (UTC) 1251:21:43, 15 November 2006 (UTC) 1241:18:38, 17 November 2006 (UTC) 1222:21:20, 15 November 2006 (UTC) 823:19:53, 6 September 2006 (UTC) 813:12:11, 6 September 2006 (UTC) 795:22:32, 17 December 2006 (UTC) 784:06:53, 17 December 2006 (UTC) 590:How do I do it? New Webmaster 477:19:58, 6 September 2006 (UTC) 370:15:10, August 29, 2005 (UTC) 362:00:23, August 29, 2005 (UTC) 351:00:19, August 29, 2005 (UTC) 323:20:18, August 20, 2005 (UTC) 211:As a technical article it is 4101:20:49, 20 October 2007 (UTC) 4091:20:30, 20 October 2007 (UTC) 3885:It has now been put back at 3355:09:34, 8 December 2007 (UTC) 3174:18:45, 8 February 2007 (UTC) 3147:14:35, 26 January 2007 (UTC) 3129:14:34, 26 January 2007 (UTC) 3103:03:11, 26 January 2007 (UTC) 2243:01:24, 26 January 2007 (UTC) 2216:23:04, 25 January 2007 (UTC) 2205:22:19, 25 January 2007 (UTC) 1875:Gigantic podcasting template 1870:03:30, 25 January 2007 (UTC) 1334:16:32, 7 December 2006 (UTC) 1123:21:42, 8 November 2006 (UTC) 1106:11:49, 7 November 2007 (UTC) 955:18:31, 9 November 2006 (UTC) 941:10:14, 9 November 2006 (UTC) 931:04:18, 20 October 2006 (UTC) 908:15:35, 19 October 2006 (UTC) 893:13:47, 10 October 2006 (UTC) 689:Future versions, icon misuse 634:17:57, 11 January 2006 (UTC) 599:17:20, 11 January 2006 (UTC) 547:19:42, 28 October 2005 (UTC) 530:03:34, 26 October 2005 (UTC) 413:22:51, 14 October 2005 (UTC) 396:09:19, 11 October 2005 (UTC) 379:09:04, 11 October 2005 (UTC) 7: 4026:15:43, 20 August 2007 (UTC) 4011:14:34, 15 August 2007 (UTC) 3973:09:00, 15 August 2007 (UTC) 3847:. For the full comment see 3368:I have recommended merging 2648:Inter-process communication 2225:think it should be removed 2211:on a bunch of articles. -- 1940:Commercial Podcast Networks 1853:12:59, 5 January 2007 (UTC) 1835:13:00, 3 January 2007 (UTC) 1826:21:28, 2 January 2007 (UTC) 1815:10:01, 2 January 2007 (UTC) 1791:Missing reference to NewsML 1783:12:53, 5 January 2007 (UTC) 1744:19:13, 4 January 2007 (UTC) 1732:17:20, 4 January 2007 (UTC) 1718:16:36, 4 January 2007 (UTC) 1691:Talk:Cascading Style Sheets 1679:14:41, 4 January 2007 (UTC) 1669:19:26, 3 January 2007 (UTC) 1617:12:57, 3 January 2007 (UTC) 1603:21:30, 2 January 2007 (UTC) 1594:09:12, 2 January 2007 (UTC) 1576:17:19, 1 January 2007 (UTC) 1562:10:22, 1 January 2007 (UTC) 1169:19:39, 30 August 2008 (UTC) 1002:14:01, 8 January 2007 (UTC) 971:19:07, 6 January 2007 (UTC) 582:15:38, 4 January 2006 (UTC) 337:01:03, 21 August 2005 (UTC) 332:then merge if necessary. -- 227:Indeed - thanks very much. 180:Why not write it yourself? 10: 4125: 3580:16:39, 12 April 2007 (UTC) 3492:17:15, 22 March 2007 (UTC) 3458:00:58, 16 March 2007 (UTC) 3425:18:46, 12 March 2007 (UTC) 3409:18:33, 12 March 2007 (UTC) 3377:01:53, 11 March 2007 (UTC) 2315:Web syndication technology 1549:social networking website. 1533:experience working here), 1127:Who owns logo copyrights? 464:16:46, 24 March 2006 (UTC) 3958:19:19, 15 July 2007 (UTC) 3926:21:11, 19 June 2007 (UTC) 3916:21:03, 19 June 2007 (UTC) 3894:16:57, 19 June 2007 (UTC) 3880:11:09, 19 June 2007 (UTC) 3824:22:24, 26 June 2007 (UTC) 3814:21:58, 26 June 2007 (UTC) 3804:16:20, 12 June 2007 (UTC) 3794:15:13, 12 June 2007 (UTC) 3779:02:57, 12 June 2007 (UTC) 3751:15:10, 11 June 2007 (UTC) 3437:Aspects of the Mass Media 3416:Well do edit remembering 3329:21:41, 20 June 2007 (UTC) 3324:readers to add it here. 3319:20:03, 20 June 2007 (UTC) 3209:article and moving it to 3030: 2935: 2870: 2863: 2801: 2738: 2731: 2686: 2640: 2612: 2569: 2538: 2487: 2466: 2459: 2332: 2323: 2292: 1884: 1011:I was going to a link to 768:05:09, 6 April 2009 (UTC) 751:02:34, 6 April 2009 (UTC) 725:05:01, 13 July 2006 (UTC) 482:Quotes on RSS Controversy 304:03:53, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC) 277:00:05, 5 March 2006 (UTC) 204:19:27, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC) 142:00:16, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC) 3866:21:59, 31 May 2007 (UTC) 3729:15:56, 30 May 2007 (UTC) 3697:RSS 2.0 spec controversy 3691:17:36, 24 May 2007 (UTC) 3671:15:30, 24 May 2007 (UTC) 3652:05:11, 19 May 2007 (UTC) 3634:21:25, 18 May 2007 (UTC) 3604:01:44, 16 May 2007 (UTC) 3531:http://www.wikipedia.org 3464:RSS / PodCast Conversion 1059:Okay. I won't add it. 867:07:13, 20 May 2007 (UTC) 774:File format not Protocol 707:14:06, 5 July 2006 (UTC) 685:2:32, 31 May 2006 (UTC) 664:11:04 09 March 2006 GMT 313:List of news aggregators 114:13:16, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC) 95:05:20, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC) 75:File format not Protocol 3613:Text currently states: 1055:02:32, 1 May 2007 (UTC) 1046:02:28, 1 May 2007 (UTC) 672:10:35, 3 May 2006 (UTC) 89:communications protocol 3860: 3723: 3627: 3619: 1687:Cascading Style Sheets 1498:about external links. 1417:Remove the right links 1392:Came across this site 878:List of search engines 731:Abbreviation Incorrect 563: 449:Knowledge:Village pump 445:meta:Syndication_feeds 406:meta:Syndication_feeds 356:Knowledge:Village pump 242:an explanation of the 209:I couldn't agree more. 3853: 3718: 3623: 3615: 3418:Knowledge:Attribution 3399:comment was added by 3189:History of podcasting 2167:History of Podcasting 2029:Movies and Television 1200:) 15 November, 2006. 1188:comment was added by 1021:23:29, April 30, 2007 988:comment was added by 559: 514:Merging "What's RSS?" 343:Knowledge RSS support 302:Mayuresh Kadu (India) 42:of past discussions. 4016:Use the same example 3658:RSS is not ownerless 3645:This left the format 3048:Glossary of blogging 3012:Social communication 2045:Science and Medicine 1798:Here are some links: 1464:About social network 296:AtomEnabled Alliance 130:heckler, wikispammer 3993:I'd like to remove 3857:...</source: --> 3676:James, I like your 3595:further information 3259:WP:NOT#IINFO item 4 2053:Society and Culture 1432:RSS Security Risks= 712:OK then. Deleting. 508:) 29 September 2005 3932:Image:RSS icon.svg 3518:this Google search 3514:Talk:The Long Tail 3159:Ramanathan V. Guha 3073:Uses of podcasting 2811:Collaborative blog 2806:Anonymous blogging 2699:RSS Advisory Board 2367:Electronic journal 2187:Uses of Podcasting 2017:Health and Fitness 1358:Archive talk page? 962:I have created an 913:Discuss links here 91:doesn't list it. 3787:rewriting history 3546:Hurricane Katrina 3412: 3357: 3345:comment added by 3301: 3295: 3249: 3243: 3085: 3084: 3081: 3080: 2872:Alternative media 2859: 2858: 2821:Instant messaging 2727: 2726: 2455: 2454: 2194: 2193: 2183:Social Podcasting 1705:RSS (file format) 1648:RSS (file format) 1457: 1445:comment added by 1280: 1201: 1151: 1142:comment added by 1108: 1092:comment added by 1066: 1061:comment added by 1022: 1017:comment added by 1005: 964:online RSS Reader 926: 741:comment added by 510: 496:comment added by 384:More can be read 72: 71: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 4116: 4063:User:Jamesdennis 3955:Craig R. Nielsen 3952: 3946: 3609:Incomprehensible 3394: 3370:Attention stream 3364:Merge suggestion 3340: 3297: 3291: 3245: 3239: 3142: 3139: 3124: 3121: 3099: 3094: 2868: 2867: 2748:Enhanced podcast 2736: 2735: 2464: 2463: 2330: 2329: 2279: 2272: 2265: 2256: 2255: 2239: 2234: 2152:Related Articles 2126:Stephen Merchant 2114:Garrison Keillor 1909: 1902: 1895: 1882: 1440: 1303: 1274: 1183: 1137: 1087: 1060: 1030:(advertising) , 1016: 1013:RSS @ W3 Schools 983: 918: 753: 722: 719: 704: 701: 509: 490: 461: 458: 429:(moved from top) 423:(moved from top) 190: 187: 121:. -capn_midnight 63: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 4124: 4123: 4119: 4118: 4117: 4115: 4114: 4113: 4033: 4018: 3991: 3989:not yet notable 3965: 3939: 3873: 3838: 3699: 3660: 3641:This the format 3611: 3587: 3506:According to a 3504: 3466: 3433: 3395:—The preceding 3384: 3366: 3231: 3181: 3155: 3140: 3137: 3122: 3119: 3097: 3092: 3086: 3077: 3063:Slashdot effect 3026: 3017:Social software 2931: 2855: 2836:Mobile blogging 2797: 2723: 2682: 2678:Streaming media 2636: 2608: 2565: 2561:Synchronization 2534: 2483: 2479:Feed URI scheme 2451: 2347:Classical music 2319: 2288: 2286:Web syndication 2283: 2237: 2232: 2175:Push Technology 2049:Science Fiction 1914: 1913: 1877: 1860: 1845: 1801:NewsML web site 1793: 1480: 1466: 1434: 1419: 1390: 1360: 1350:Robert Rapplean 1342: 1326: 1301: 1292: 1230: 1190:62.136.196.109 1184:—The preceding 1176: 1115: 1077: 984:—The preceding 915: 900: 882:News aggregator 874: 854:Apantomimehorse 831: 803: 801:Jonathan Avidan 776: 736: 733: 717: 714: 699: 696: 691: 679: 650: 606: 592: 555: 516: 491: 484: 456: 453: 393:Anthony Liekens 376:Anthony Liekens 345: 329:News aggregator 310: 285: 265: 198: 185: 182: 161: 148: 132: 77: 59: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 4122: 4112: 4111: 4110: 4109: 4108: 4107: 4106: 4105: 4104: 4103: 4032: 4029: 4017: 4014: 3990: 3984: 3983: 3982: 3964: 3961: 3938: 3929: 3897: 3896: 3872: 3869: 3837: 3834: 3833: 3832: 3831: 3830: 3829: 3828: 3827: 3826: 3754: 3753: 3698: 3695: 3694: 3693: 3682: 3681: 3659: 3656: 3655: 3654: 3610: 3607: 3586: 3583: 3574: 3573: 3568: 3563: 3558: 3553: 3548: 3543: 3538: 3533: 3528: 3503: 3496: 3495: 3494: 3476: 3475: 3465: 3462: 3461: 3460: 3441: 3440: 3432: 3429: 3428: 3427: 3401:134.174.140.32 3383: 3380: 3365: 3362: 3361: 3360: 3359: 3358: 3334: 3333: 3332: 3331: 3308: 3307: 3306: 3280: 3273: 3272: 3230: 3227: 3226: 3225: 3197:betsythedevine 3180: 3177: 3154: 3151: 3150: 3149: 3132: 3131: 3083: 3082: 3079: 3078: 3076: 3075: 3070: 3065: 3060: 3055: 3050: 3045: 3043:Escribitionist 3040: 3034: 3032: 3028: 3027: 3025: 3024: 3019: 3014: 3009: 3008: 3007: 3002: 2992: 2987: 2982: 2977: 2972: 2971: 2970: 2965: 2960: 2955: 2950: 2939: 2937: 2933: 2932: 2930: 2929: 2924: 2919: 2914: 2912:Search engines 2909: 2904: 2903: 2902: 2897: 2887: 2882: 2876: 2874: 2865: 2861: 2860: 2857: 2856: 2854: 2853: 2848: 2846:Video blogging 2843: 2838: 2833: 2828: 2823: 2818: 2813: 2808: 2802: 2799: 2798: 2796: 2795: 2790: 2785: 2780: 2775: 2770: 2765: 2760: 2755: 2750: 2745: 2739: 2733: 2729: 2728: 2725: 2724: 2722: 2721: 2716: 2711: 2709:World Wide Web 2706: 2701: 2696: 2690: 2688: 2684: 2683: 2681: 2680: 2675: 2670: 2665: 2660: 2655: 2650: 2644: 2642: 2638: 2637: 2635: 2634: 2629: 2624: 2618: 2616: 2610: 2609: 2607: 2606: 2601: 2596: 2591: 2586: 2581: 2575: 2573: 2567: 2566: 2564: 2563: 2558: 2553: 2548: 2542: 2540: 2536: 2535: 2533: 2532: 2527: 2522: 2517: 2512: 2507: 2502: 2497: 2491: 2489: 2485: 2484: 2482: 2481: 2476: 2470: 2468: 2461: 2457: 2456: 2453: 2452: 2450: 2449: 2444: 2439: 2434: 2429: 2424: 2419: 2414: 2409: 2404: 2399: 2394: 2389: 2384: 2379: 2374: 2369: 2364: 2359: 2354: 2349: 2344: 2339: 2333: 2327: 2321: 2320: 2318: 2317: 2312: 2307: 2302: 2297: 2293: 2290: 2289: 2282: 2281: 2274: 2267: 2259: 2253: 2252: 2248: 2247: 2246: 2245: 2192: 2191: 2189: 2155: 2147: 2146: 2144: 2090: 2082: 2081: 2079: 2013:Food and Drink 1977: 1969: 1968: 1966: 1960:Video Podcasts 1928:Audio Podcasts 1924: 1916: 1915: 1912: 1911: 1904: 1897: 1889: 1885: 1876: 1873: 1859: 1856: 1844: 1841: 1840: 1839: 1838: 1837: 1810: 1807: 1803: 1799: 1797: 1792: 1789: 1788: 1787: 1786: 1785: 1776: 1775:- 3 tutorials. 1770: 1764: 1763:- 4 tutorials. 1758: 1757:- 9 tutorials. 1752: 1749: 1736: 1735: 1734: 1721: 1720: 1710: 1709: 1696: 1695: 1683: 1682: 1681: 1662: 1661: 1660: 1652: 1651: 1644: 1628: 1627: 1626: 1625: 1624: 1623: 1622: 1621: 1620: 1619: 1555: 1554: 1551: 1550: 1546: 1545: 1530: 1529: 1506: 1505: 1479: 1476: 1465: 1462: 1460: 1433: 1430: 1418: 1415: 1414: 1413: 1389: 1386: 1385: 1384: 1359: 1356: 1341: 1338: 1337: 1336: 1325: 1322: 1321: 1320: 1291: 1288: 1287: 1286: 1285: 1284: 1269: 1268: 1267: 1264: 1255: 1254: 1229: 1226: 1225: 1224: 1175: 1172: 1161:James thirteen 1154: 1114: 1111: 1110: 1109: 1076: 1073: 1072: 1071: 1070: 1069: 1068: 1067: 1065:April 30, 2007 1009: 1008: 1007: 1006: 960: 959: 958: 957: 944: 943: 914: 911: 899: 896: 890:betsythedevine 873: 870: 830: 827: 826: 825: 820:betsythedevine 802: 799: 798: 797: 775: 772: 771: 770: 760:betsythedevine 732: 729: 728: 727: 690: 687: 678: 677:Need more info 675: 649: 646: 645: 644: 605: 602: 591: 588: 587: 586: 585: 584: 554: 553:"A Lot Better" 551: 550: 549: 519:User:Bastawhiz 515: 512: 483: 480: 474:betsythedevine 467: 466: 440: 439: 438: 437: 418: 417: 416: 415: 399: 398: 344: 341: 340: 339: 309: 306: 284: 281: 280: 279: 264: 261: 260: 259: 258: 257: 256: 255: 254: 253: 238:RSS4medics.com 229:138.37.199.199 197: 194: 193: 192: 160: 157: 147: 144: 131: 128: 127: 126: 125: 124: 123: 122: 97: 96: 76: 73: 70: 69: 64: 52: 51: 34: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 4121: 4102: 4099: 4094: 4093: 4092: 4089: 4085: 4084: 4083: 4080: 4076: 4072: 4068: 4064: 4061: 4060: 4059: 4056: 4052: 4048: 4047: 4044: 4043: 4042: 4041: 4038: 4028: 4027: 4024: 4013: 4012: 4009: 4005: 4000: 3996: 3988: 3981: 3977: 3976: 3975: 3974: 3971: 3960: 3959: 3956: 3951: 3945: 3937: 3933: 3928: 3927: 3924: 3918: 3917: 3914: 3910: 3906: 3902: 3895: 3892: 3888: 3884: 3883: 3882: 3881: 3878: 3868: 3867: 3864: 3859: 3852: 3850: 3846: 3842: 3825: 3822: 3817: 3816: 3815: 3812: 3807: 3806: 3805: 3802: 3797: 3796: 3795: 3792: 3788: 3783: 3782: 3781: 3780: 3777: 3772: 3770: 3766: 3763: 3759: 3752: 3749: 3745: 3741: 3737: 3733: 3732: 3731: 3730: 3727: 3722: 3717: 3715: 3711: 3707: 3703: 3692: 3689: 3684: 3683: 3679: 3678:recent update 3675: 3674: 3673: 3672: 3669: 3663: 3653: 3650: 3646: 3642: 3638: 3637: 3636: 3635: 3632: 3626: 3622: 3618: 3614: 3606: 3605: 3602: 3598: 3596: 3592: 3582: 3581: 3578: 3572: 3569: 3567: 3564: 3562: 3559: 3557: 3554: 3552: 3549: 3547: 3544: 3542: 3539: 3537: 3534: 3532: 3529: 3527: 3524: 3523: 3522: 3519: 3515: 3511: 3510: 3501: 3493: 3490: 3486: 3482: 3478: 3477: 3474: 3471: 3470: 3469: 3459: 3456: 3452: 3447: 3443: 3442: 3438: 3435: 3434: 3426: 3423: 3419: 3415: 3414: 3413: 3410: 3406: 3402: 3398: 3391: 3387: 3379: 3378: 3375: 3371: 3356: 3352: 3348: 3347:222.127.228.8 3344: 3338: 3337: 3336: 3335: 3330: 3327: 3322: 3321: 3320: 3317: 3313: 3309: 3305: 3300: 3294: 3289: 3285: 3284:<item: --> 3281: 3277: 3276: 3275: 3274: 3271: 3268: 3264: 3260: 3256: 3255: 3254: 3253: 3248: 3242: 3237: 3229:Creating RSS? 3224: 3221: 3216: 3212: 3208: 3204: 3203: 3202: 3201: 3198: 3194: 3190: 3186: 3176: 3175: 3171: 3168: 3164: 3160: 3148: 3145: 3143: 3134: 3133: 3130: 3127: 3125: 3116: 3111: 3107: 3106: 3105: 3104: 3101: 3100: 3095: 3074: 3071: 3069: 3068:Spam in blogs 3066: 3064: 3061: 3059: 3058:Posting style 3056: 3054: 3053:Pay per click 3051: 3049: 3046: 3044: 3041: 3039: 3036: 3035: 3033: 3029: 3023: 3020: 3018: 3015: 3013: 3010: 3006: 3003: 3001: 2998: 2997: 2996: 2993: 2991: 2988: 2986: 2985:Broadcatching 2983: 2981: 2978: 2976: 2973: 2969: 2966: 2964: 2961: 2959: 2956: 2954: 2951: 2949: 2946: 2945: 2944: 2941: 2940: 2938: 2934: 2928: 2927:Web directory 2925: 2923: 2920: 2918: 2915: 2913: 2910: 2908: 2905: 2901: 2898: 2896: 2893: 2892: 2891: 2888: 2886: 2883: 2881: 2878: 2877: 2875: 2873: 2869: 2866: 2862: 2852: 2849: 2847: 2844: 2842: 2839: 2837: 2834: 2832: 2829: 2827: 2824: 2822: 2819: 2817: 2814: 2812: 2809: 2807: 2804: 2803: 2800: 2794: 2791: 2789: 2786: 2784: 2781: 2779: 2776: 2774: 2771: 2769: 2766: 2764: 2761: 2759: 2758:Narrowcasting 2756: 2754: 2751: 2749: 2746: 2744: 2743:Audio podcast 2741: 2740: 2737: 2734: 2730: 2720: 2717: 2715: 2712: 2710: 2707: 2705: 2702: 2700: 2697: 2695: 2692: 2691: 2689: 2685: 2679: 2676: 2674: 2671: 2669: 2666: 2664: 2661: 2659: 2656: 2654: 2651: 2649: 2646: 2645: 2643: 2639: 2633: 2630: 2628: 2625: 2623: 2620: 2619: 2617: 2615: 2611: 2605: 2602: 2600: 2597: 2595: 2592: 2590: 2587: 2585: 2582: 2580: 2577: 2576: 2574: 2572: 2568: 2562: 2559: 2557: 2556:RSS enclosure 2554: 2552: 2549: 2547: 2544: 2543: 2541: 2537: 2531: 2528: 2526: 2523: 2521: 2518: 2516: 2513: 2511: 2508: 2506: 2503: 2501: 2498: 2496: 2493: 2492: 2490: 2486: 2480: 2477: 2475: 2472: 2471: 2469: 2465: 2462: 2458: 2448: 2445: 2443: 2440: 2438: 2435: 2433: 2430: 2428: 2425: 2423: 2420: 2418: 2415: 2413: 2410: 2408: 2405: 2403: 2400: 2398: 2395: 2393: 2390: 2388: 2385: 2383: 2380: 2378: 2375: 2373: 2370: 2368: 2365: 2363: 2360: 2358: 2355: 2353: 2350: 2348: 2345: 2343: 2340: 2338: 2335: 2334: 2331: 2328: 2326: 2322: 2316: 2313: 2311: 2308: 2306: 2303: 2301: 2298: 2295: 2294: 2291: 2287: 2280: 2275: 2273: 2268: 2266: 2261: 2260: 2257: 2250: 2249: 2244: 2241: 2240: 2235: 2228: 2224: 2219: 2218: 2217: 2214: 2209: 2208: 2207: 2206: 2203: 2199: 2190: 2188: 2184: 2180: 2176: 2172: 2168: 2164: 2160: 2154: 2153: 2148: 2145: 2143: 2139: 2135: 2131: 2127: 2123: 2119: 2115: 2111: 2110:Penn Jillette 2107: 2106:Ricky Gervais 2103: 2099: 2095: 2089: 2088: 2087:Famous People 2083: 2080: 2078: 2074: 2070: 2066: 2062: 2058: 2054: 2050: 2046: 2042: 2038: 2034: 2030: 2026: 2022: 2018: 2014: 2010: 2006: 2002: 1998: 1994: 1990: 1986: 1982: 1976: 1975: 1970: 1967: 1965: 1961: 1957: 1953: 1952:Narrowcasting 1949: 1945: 1941: 1937: 1933: 1929: 1923: 1922: 1917: 1910: 1905: 1903: 1898: 1896: 1891: 1890: 1888: 1883: 1880: 1872: 1871: 1868: 1864: 1855: 1854: 1851: 1836: 1833: 1829: 1828: 1827: 1824: 1819: 1818: 1817: 1816: 1813: 1812:John Clarigon 1806: 1802: 1784: 1781: 1777: 1774: 1771: 1768: 1765: 1762: 1759: 1756: 1753: 1750: 1747: 1746: 1745: 1742: 1737: 1733: 1730: 1725: 1724: 1723: 1722: 1719: 1716: 1712: 1711: 1706: 1702: 1698: 1697: 1692: 1688: 1684: 1680: 1677: 1672: 1671: 1670: 1667: 1663: 1659: 1656: 1655: 1654: 1653: 1649: 1645: 1642: 1638: 1634: 1630: 1629: 1618: 1615: 1611: 1606: 1605: 1604: 1601: 1597: 1596: 1595: 1592: 1588: 1584: 1579: 1578: 1577: 1574: 1570: 1566:See WP:NOT. 1565: 1564: 1563: 1560: 1556: 1552: 1547: 1542: 1541: 1540: 1539: 1536: 1528: 1525: 1521: 1517: 1516: 1515: 1514: 1511: 1504: 1501: 1497: 1492: 1491: 1490: 1489: 1486: 1475: 1474: 1471: 1461: 1458: 1456: 1452: 1448: 1447:75.52.121.176 1444: 1439: 1429: 1428: 1425: 1412: 1409: 1405: 1404: 1403: 1402: 1399: 1395: 1394:TheJackyl.com 1388:TheJackyl.com 1383: 1380: 1376: 1372: 1371: 1370: 1369: 1366: 1355: 1354: 1351: 1346: 1335: 1332: 1331:Ethicalhacker 1328: 1327: 1319: 1316: 1311: 1310: 1309: 1308: 1305: 1304: 1297: 1283: 1278: 1273: 1270: 1265: 1262: 1261: 1259: 1258: 1257: 1256: 1252: 1249: 1245: 1244: 1243: 1242: 1239: 1235: 1234:User:Mushroom 1223: 1220: 1216: 1212: 1208: 1204: 1203: 1202: 1199: 1195: 1191: 1187: 1180: 1174:RSSFormat.com 1171: 1170: 1166: 1162: 1158: 1155:According to 1152: 1149: 1145: 1141: 1135: 1131: 1130: 1125: 1124: 1121: 1107: 1103: 1099: 1095: 1091: 1086: 1083: 1082: 1081: 1064: 1058: 1057: 1056: 1053: 1049: 1048: 1047: 1044: 1040: 1037: 1033: 1029: 1025: 1024: 1023: 1020: 1014: 1003: 999: 995: 991: 987: 981: 977: 976: 975: 974: 973: 972: 969: 965: 956: 953: 948: 947: 946: 945: 942: 939: 935: 934: 933: 932: 929: 924: 923: 922:You can help! 910: 909: 906: 895: 894: 891: 887: 883: 879: 869: 868: 865: 859: 858: 855: 851: 846: 844: 840: 836: 824: 821: 817: 816: 815: 814: 811: 806: 796: 793: 788: 787: 786: 785: 782: 769: 765: 761: 756: 755: 754: 752: 748: 744: 740: 726: 723: 720: 711: 710: 709: 708: 705: 702: 686: 684: 674: 673: 670: 665: 663: 659: 655: 642: 638: 637: 636: 635: 632: 626: 622: 618: 614: 610: 601: 600: 597: 583: 580: 577: 573: 572: 571: 570: 569: 568: 562: 558: 548: 545: 541: 538: 534: 533: 532: 531: 528: 524: 520: 511: 507: 503: 499: 495: 489: 479: 478: 475: 471: 465: 462: 459: 450: 446: 442: 441: 435: 434: 433: 432: 431: 430: 425: 424: 414: 411: 407: 403: 402: 401: 400: 397: 394: 390: 387: 383: 382: 381: 380: 377: 371: 369: 363: 361: 357: 352: 350: 338: 335: 330: 326: 325: 324: 322: 318: 314: 308:Web directory 305: 303: 298: 297: 294:More info on 292: 290: 278: 275: 271: 270: 269: 263:NPOV Concerns 250: 249: 245: 239: 235: 234: 233: 230: 226: 225: 222: 218: 217: 214: 210: 207: 206: 205: 203: 191: 188: 179: 178: 177: 176: 171: 170: 165: 156: 154: 146:Major editing 143: 141: 137: 120: 116: 115: 113: 109: 105: 101: 100: 99: 98: 94: 90: 86: 82: 81: 80: 68: 65: 62: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 4077:be removed. 4075:Atom section 4051:Atom section 4034: 4023:MasterDragon 4019: 3992: 3966: 3940: 3919: 3898: 3891:Andy Mabbett 3877:Andy Mabbett 3874: 3861: 3854: 3839: 3773: 3767: 3755: 3724: 3719: 3700: 3664: 3661: 3644: 3640: 3628: 3624: 3620: 3616: 3612: 3599: 3594: 3588: 3575: 3509:this posting 3508: 3505: 3467: 3392: 3388: 3385: 3367: 3312:irisfeed.com 3283: 3232: 3182: 3156: 3109: 3090: 3087: 2907:Online diary 2851:Motovlogging 2826:Liveblogging 2773:Slidecasting 2673:RSS tracking 2594:Product feed 2342:Bloggernacle 2230: 2226: 2222: 2195: 2157: 2151: 2150: 2130:Barack Obama 2102:John Edwards 2098:Chris DiBona 2092: 2086: 2085: 1979: 1973: 1972: 1944:Mediacasting 1926: 1920: 1919: 1878: 1861: 1846: 1794: 1700: 1657: 1586: 1582: 1567: 1531: 1507: 1481: 1467: 1459: 1435: 1420: 1398:Tommyboy1985 1391: 1361: 1347: 1343: 1299: 1295: 1293: 1231: 1206: 1181: 1177: 1153: 1132: 1126: 1116: 1078: 1035: 1010: 961: 920: 916: 901: 875: 860: 847: 832: 807: 804: 777: 734: 713: 695: 692: 680: 666: 651: 627: 623: 619: 617:same thing. 615: 611: 607: 593: 564: 560: 556: 536: 517: 485: 468: 452: 428: 426: 422: 419: 372: 364: 353: 346: 311: 299: 293: 286: 272:I agree. -- 266: 247: 243: 241: 212: 208: 202:Throbblefoot 199: 181: 175:Rhodomontade 172: 166: 162: 155:20 Feb 2005 149: 140:Mr alex hall 133: 78: 60: 43: 37: 4088:Jamesdennis 4055:Jamesdennis 3668:Jamesdennis 3341:—Preceding 3038:Blogosphere 2943:Aggregation 2763:Peercasting 2663:Referencing 2357:Dream diary 2198:User:Ganfon 2122:Irene McGee 2118:Leo Laporte 2073:Video Games 2005:Educational 1985:Automobiles 1956:Peercasting 1936:Blogcasting 1932:Autocasting 1701:file format 1641:Wikiversity 1441:—Preceding 1296:file format 1207:file format 1144:203.23.60.6 1138:—Preceding 1088:—Preceding 980:RSS Readers 864:24.13.242.3 743:24.4.206.66 737:—Preceding 656:instead of 523:What's RSS? 492:—Preceding 274:Ben Houston 36:This is an 4098:EdJohnston 4079:EdJohnston 4037:EdJohnston 4008:EdJohnston 3913:EdJohnston 3909:RSS editor 3901:RSS editor 3887:RSS editor 3863:EdJohnston 3841:User:Ramir 3821:EdJohnston 3801:EdJohnston 3776:EdJohnston 3736:this month 3726:EdJohnston 3688:EdJohnston 3649:EdJohnston 3577:EdJohnston 3489:EdJohnston 3455:EdJohnston 3372:into RSS. 3326:EdJohnston 3267:EdJohnston 3220:EdJohnston 3185:Podcasting 3153:cite check 2936:Micromedia 2890:Journalism 2793:Web series 2768:Screencast 2753:Mobilecast 2668:RSS editor 2551:Geotagging 2515:Reblogging 2474:BitTorrent 2460:Technology 2305:Podcasting 2202:EdJohnston 2163:Godcasting 2159:Aggregator 2138:Molly Wood 2134:Dave Winer 2094:Adam Curry 2065:Technology 2025:Macinstosh 1964:Vodcasting 1948:Mobilecast 1887:Podcasting 1867:EdJohnston 1823:EdJohnston 1741:EdJohnston 1715:EdJohnston 1666:EdJohnston 1600:EdJohnston 1573:EdJohnston 1496:guidelines 1485:EdJohnston 1408:EdJohnston 1379:EdJohnston 1365:EdJohnston 1315:EdJohnston 1248:EdJohnston 1238:EdJohnston 1219:EdJohnston 1120:Moronicles 1052:EdJohnston 952:EdJohnston 928:EdJohnston 905:EdJohnston 886:Technorati 810:Middenface 792:EdJohnston 781:Mahumphrey 334:Dtcdthingy 317:BitTorrent 3702:This edit 3629:Meaning? 3621:Compare: 3526:Main Page 3487:article. 3422:SqueakBox 3263:Web feeds 3163:Random832 3022:Web Slice 2880:Carnivals 2841:Spam blog 2831:Microblog 2816:Columnist 2778:Videocast 2589:Photofeed 2584:Data feed 2579:Atom feed 2539:Mechanism 2530:Trackback 2500:Permalink 2427:Political 2417:Photoblog 2352:Corporate 2077:WebComics 2037:Political 2001:Computers 1637:Wikibooks 1535:SqueakBox 1520:talk page 1510:SqueakBox 1302:iamthebob 1211:Web feeds 1034:(how-to) 835:web feeds 683:Splendour 669:Alcalazar 368:SqueakBox 360:SqueakBox 321:SqueakBox 221:this site 213:excellent 67:Archive 2 61:Archive 1 3980:j4_james 3811:j4_james 3397:unsigned 3374:Chevinki 3343:unsigned 2922:Software 2917:Sideblog 2900:Database 2783:Webcomic 2687:Standard 2653:Livemark 2604:Web feed 2599:RDF feed 2571:Memetics 2525:Rollback 2510:Pingback 2495:Linkback 2488:Features 2310:Vlogging 2300:Blogging 1993:Children 1989:Business 1583:describe 1569:recipes. 1443:unsigned 1324:Requests 1272:Mushroom 1198:contribs 1186:unsigned 1140:unsigned 1102:contribs 1090:unsigned 1063:turbov21 1019:turbov21 998:contribs 986:unsigned 938:Jupition 850:web feed 843:web feed 839:web feed 739:unsigned 631:Glossika 527:minghong 506:contribs 494:unsigned 349:Dan East 240:. It is 136:wikispam 85:protocol 18:Talk:RSS 3923:ElKevbo 3871:Editors 3639:Fixed. 3591:RSS FAQ 3585:RSS FAQ 3556:Germany 3536:Podcast 3288:ZeroOne 3236:ZeroOne 3031:Related 2990:Hashtag 2980:AtomPub 2895:Citizen 2885:Fiction 2788:Webtoon 2520:Refback 2467:General 2447:Warblog 2437:Reverse 2432:Project 2402:Lifelog 2382:Fashion 2362:Edublog 2296:History 2213:ElKevbo 2041:Religon 1587:explain 1094:Caesar0 248:the how 169:Bstepno 159:various 39:archive 3999:GeoRSS 3995:GeoRSS 3987:GeoRSS 3643:-: --> 3571:Greece 2995:NewsML 2963:Search 2958:Review 2704:Usenet 2658:Mashup 2641:Social 2632:RSS TV 2622:GeoRSS 2546:Thread 2442:Travel 2422:Police 2392:Health 2377:Family 2142:Others 2069:Travel 2057:Sports 2009:Family 1997:Comedy 1974:Genres 1850:Jahowk 1832:Jahowk 1780:Jahowk 1729:Jahowk 1676:Jahowk 1614:Jahowk 1591:Jahowk 1559:Jahowk 1524:Jahowk 1500:Jahowk 1470:Jahowk 1424:Jahowk 1032:WP:NOT 990:Jahowk 968:Kitoba 718:rodii 700:rodii 613:HTML? 596:Gbleem 567:Robert 498:Deodar 488:Source 457:rodii 186:rodii 167:Phew. 153:Kusako 93:A-giau 3970:Tommy 3791:Rcade 3748:Rcade 3566:China 3561:Italy 3451:WP:EL 3138:Brian 3120:Brian 2968:Video 2864:Media 2325:Types 2227:until 2223:don't 2033:Music 2021:Humor 1921:Types 1708:that. 1633:WP:EL 1028:WP:EL 576:BozMo 16:< 3947:and 3934:and 3762:IETF 3758:Atom 3740:here 3714:here 3710:here 3601:Adam 3551:Blog 3498:Our 3405:talk 3351:talk 3293:talk 3241:talk 2975:Atom 2953:Poll 2948:News 2732:Form 2719:XOXO 2714:XBEL 2694:OPML 2627:MRSS 2505:Ping 2412:News 2387:Food 2372:Fake 2061:Talk 1809:all? 1767:Atom 1755:XML 1639:and 1585:and 1451:talk 1277:Talk 1194:talk 1165:talk 1148:talk 1113:Logo 1098:talk 1039:here 994:talk 764:talk 747:talk 579:talk 540:here 502:talk 410:Here 388:and 386:here 283:Atom 246:not 108:HTML 104:HTTP 4071:RSS 4004:RSS 3905:RSS 3706:RSS 3631:P0M 3541:RSS 3500:RSS 3485:RSS 3446:RSS 3316:Egg 3215:RSS 3207:RSS 3110:did 3098:fon 3093:Gan 2614:RSS 2407:MP3 2397:Law 2337:Art 2238:fon 2233:Gan 2179:RSS 2171:MP3 1981:Art 1796:is. 1773:XSL 1761:CSS 1631:In 1610:CSS 852:.-- 662:a5y 641:XML 447:or 244:why 112:Rho 87:. 3889:. 3851:: 3647:. 3516:, 3407:) 3353:) 3302:) 3296:| 3250:) 3244:| 3172:) 3108:I 3005:G2 2185:• 2181:• 2177:• 2173:• 2169:• 2165:• 2161:• 2140:• 2136:• 2132:• 2128:• 2124:• 2120:• 2116:• 2112:• 2108:• 2104:• 2100:• 2096:• 2075:• 2071:• 2067:• 2063:• 2059:• 2055:• 2051:• 2047:• 2043:• 2039:• 2035:• 2031:• 2027:• 2023:• 2019:• 2015:• 2011:• 2007:• 2003:• 1999:• 1995:• 1991:• 1987:• 1983:• 1962:• 1958:• 1954:• 1950:• 1946:• 1942:• 1938:• 1934:• 1930:• 1453:) 1298:. 1196:• 1167:) 1104:) 1100:• 1000:) 996:• 982:. 880:, 766:) 749:) 504:• 451:. 391:-- 374:-- 358:, 319:, 300:-- 3411:. 3403:( 3349:( 3299:@ 3290:( 3247:@ 3238:( 3170:c 3167:t 3165:( 3141:Z 3123:Z 3000:1 2278:e 2271:t 2264:v 1908:e 1901:t 1894:v 1449:( 1279:) 1275:( 1253:" 1192:( 1163:( 1146:( 1096:( 1043:♠ 1041:… 1036:∴ 1004:. 992:( 925:) 919:( 762:( 745:( 721:· 715:· 703:· 697:· 544:♠ 542:… 537:∴ 500:( 460:· 454:· 189:· 183:· 50:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index