Top	[This Network is not currently active and cannot accept new posts]
<- Previous	Next ->

1473 hits

Feb 13, 2003 10:12 pm		re: re: RSS vs RDF for blog feeds
Mark James		Actually, at least the version of MT I use (2.51) generates both versions, automatically. Other tools certainly could. So in a way it is really a choice for the aggregator, not the blogger. And at least my PHP aggregator (Rippy the Aggregator) seems to understand both. > Terry Frazier wrote: > Some of the best places to find info on the RDF vs RSS issue are: > What is RSS? > The Next Front[ier] in the Disruption of Traditional Media > diveintomark > benhammersly.com >In short, RSS v.091/092/2.0 meet the needs of most bloggers pretty well. RDF (aka RSS 1.0) seems bigger, more complicated, less widespread, and less easily grasped by non-geeks. But either works. > > >> danny sullivan wrote: >>Does anyone know the difference between a site summary in .RDF vs one named RSS.XML? I think that moveable type uses RDF, but I haven't seen it anywhere else. Private Reply to Mark James (new win)

© Ryze Limited. Ryze is a trademark of Ryze Limited.  Terms of Service, including the Privacy Policy