Feed.TXT - A Free Feeds Format in Plain Text w/ Structured Meta Data and Markdown ; -)

[Gerald Bauer]

Hello,

> As far as I can tell there is no upside to JSON feed other than "it isn't XML".  I don't see a business case for supporting another feed format simply because JSON is easier to parse.

    Dare I say that you have never worked with trying to read / parse
RSS. Here's the RSS parser / builder for the "universal" feedparser
(from my humble self ;-) [1] and here's the JSON version [2].

     What's the difference? What's the "business case"?

     Do you know how many ways are there to encode html content in RSS 2.0?

- description may or may not be full content; it may be actually a
"description" e.g. summary
-  there might be the RDF/RSS 1.0 content module uses in RSS 2.0
holding the content
-  or might be the summary in the RSS Yahoo media extension?
-  and on and on

   No can you tell me if you find the content if the content is in
html or xhtml or escaped html or in plain text?

    Bonus: How do you find the banner image for content or the feed
icon or the author avatar? Did you know that atomic RSS is now a "best
practice", that is, atom elements inside RSS 2.0?

    Anyways, in JSON Feed and in Feed.TXT (even simpler) if you want
to lookup the content in html it is always in content_html. A bonus
summary is in summary (always in text) and content in plain text is in
content_text.

      Now where's the money? I'd say that's the wrong way to look at
it. I'd say learn from evolution - simpler, easier wins - might take
years - but watch ;-). Cheers.

PS: Bonus: Talk Notes from last week "Meet Jason Feed - The New Web
Feed & Syndication Guy - The Future of Online News 'n' Facebook & Co"
[3].

[1] https://github.com/feedparser/feedparser/blob/master/lib/feedparser/builder/rss.rb
[2] https://github.com/feedparser/feedparser/blob/master/lib/feedparser/builder/json.rb
[3] https://github.com/geraldb/talks/blob/master/jsonfeed.md

2017-06-06 18:41 GMT+02:00 James Smits <james.smits at gmail.com>:
> I know this is the wrong list for this, but JSON Feed seems like as much of
> a joke as Feed.TXT.  RSS works and has widespread adoption.  As far as I can
> tell there is no upside to JSON feed other than "it isn't XML".  I don't see
> a business case for supporting another feed format simply because JSON is
> easier to parse.
>
> On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 3:25 AM, Gerald Bauer <gerald.bauer at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>>    The structured meta data block is (simplified) YAML [1] e.g:
>>
>> id:        http://therecord.co/chris-parrish
>>  title:     Special #1 - Chris Parrish
>>  url:       http://therecord.co/chris-parrish
>>  summary:   Brent interviews Chris Parrish, co-host of The Record and
>> one-half of Aged & Distilled.
>>  published: 2014-05-09T14:04:00-07:00
>>  attachments:
>>  - url:
>> http://therecord.co/downloads/The-Record-sp1e1-ChrisParrish.m4a
>>    mime_type:     audio/x-m4a
>>    size_in_bytes: 89970236,
>>    duration_in_seconds: 6629
>>
>>
>>    As an alternative you can use "classic" JSON or newer human
>> versions (e.g. SON - Simple Object Notation, JSON5 or HJSON, for
>> example). If you use JSON than the begin / next / end marker change
>> e.g.:
>>
>>    |>>>      becomes    |{
>>    </>        becomes   }/{
>>    <<<|      becomes    }|
>>
>>      Cheers.
>>
>> [1] Good point- I know JSON is a subset of YAML and JSON is YAML but
>> YAML is not JSON etc.
>>
>> PS: In difference to the new YAML Feed format - Feed.TXT looks like a
>> joke too ;-) It's easy it can't be true but it's for real e.g. all
>> content blocks use plain text with markdown formatting conventions ;-)
>>  No more need to clean the HTML for cross-site scripting etc.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Markdown-Discuss mailing list
>> Markdown-Discuss at six.pairlist.net
>> https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Markdown-Discuss mailing list
> Markdown-Discuss at six.pairlist.net
> https://pairlist6.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/markdown-discuss
>