On Friday night I experimentally assigned the 2.0 version number to my feeds. Although I haven't heard about any problems related to that, I'm dropping back to 0.92 until the 2.0 spec ceases to be marked as a draft. But I'm keeping the <content:encoded> element as an alternative to the former <fullitem>. Both have the same status in 0.92: not contemplated, but not forbidden either.
Timothy Appnel wrote to point out something that I've also considered: "You should use CDATA in the content:encoded tagsets and not entity encoded HTML."
On the one hand, the mod_content spec says of <content:encoded>:
"An element whose contents are the entity-encoded or CDATA-escaped version of the content of the item."
Clearly entity-encoding fits best with current practice. But I agree that CDATA is more desirable for a variety of reasons. Perhaps now with namespaces we can have a transitional strategy that accommodates both?
PS: Just catching up with Sam Ruby's eagle-eyed observations. Thanks Sam. I've modified <docs>. And while I'd love to use Perl to munge that date, I'm doing this in UserTalk. If somebody can point me to a UserTalk equivalent, I'd be most thankful. I'm sure it's been done somewhere -- probably even somewhere in radio.root. Life's too short to reinvent that particular wheel :-)
PPS: Urp. Obviously not firing on all cylinders this morning!
Just to let you know, that is UserTalk . Written and debugged using Radio's QuickScript window (a.k.a. Ctrl-;). Enjoy! [ Sam Ruby]
Sheesh, how embarrassing. Thanks Sam! Meanwhile, I notice that if the scratchpad has a weblog posting, then this:
from which the iso8601 date could be extracted. Frontier gurus: Is there a way to get directly at it?
Former URL: http://weblog.infoworld.com/udell/2002/09/09.html#a405