Apologies to those of you whose feeds I incorrectly named in yesterday's (now updated) entry about RSS feed caching (or, rather, non-caching). I've revised the list. It does appear, though, that there is still a healthy percentage of my 200+ feeds that are not being cached.
It strikes me that the normal methods of checking whether a feed is or is not cached are way, way too geeky for ordinary users. Here's a thought: could/should the feed validator also report whether a feed is using one or another of the caching techniques, and warn if not?
Former URL: http://weblog.infoworld.com/udell/2004/02/02.html#a906