💾 Archived View for gemi.dev › gemini-mailing-list › 000963.gmi captured on 2023-12-28 at 15:55:47. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

⬅️ Previous capture (2023-11-04)

🚧 View Differences

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Why XML/Atom for feeds

1. (gemproj (a) suckless.anonaddy.com)

Hello geminauts

Yesterday I decided to add a feed to my gemlog and when I checked other
logs, most seem to feed XML or Atom. While I get that it's popular and
useful in existing clients, I am wondering why it's the de facto standard
in a protocol that favors a reduced markdown. XML always felt worse than
HTML to me, yet to do anything feed related in geminispace, I still need to
XML. Is it just me?

Best
~m

Link to individual message.

2. Omar Polo (op (a) omarpolo.com)


gemproj@suckless.anonaddy.com writes:

> Hello geminauts
>
> Yesterday I decided to add a feed to my gemlog and when I checked other
> logs, most seem to feed XML or Atom. While I get that it's popular and
> useful in existing clients, I am wondering why it's the de facto standard
> in a protocol that favors a reduced markdown. XML always felt worse than
> HTML to me, yet to do anything feed related in geminispace, I still need to
> XML. Is it just me?
>
> Best
> ~m

There's no need to serve atom feeds, you can just stick to the gemini
subscriptions companion specification:

=> gemini://gemini.circumlunar.space/docs/companion/subscription.gmi

Fundamentally, a "subscribe"-able page is a page that contains some
links in the form "YYYY-MM-DD - title"; then the various aggregators and
clients can easily subscribe to that page.  The linked page has some
examples too.  It seems more widespread than atom feeds in the gemini
space, at least in my experience.

I believe that some of us still serve atom/rss feeds just because we set
up our capsules before that spec was a thing, or because we're already
generating feeds for HTTP consumption.

HTH

Link to individual message.

3. Jonathan McHugh (indieterminacy (a) libre.brussels)

Dear ~m,

Having spent time transposing the Discogs data archive from XML (with 50GB+ files), I can
appreciate both the stengths and weaknesses of it as a format.

I can also understand why it got pushed out by the JSON format in the HTTP 
space (though I too
lament that the Ini file format wasnt used more for config style 
problems). However, I also get why XML can
be useful for the Gemini space. For example, I speculated re the utility 
of XML Bookmark Exchange
Language (XBEL) on this ML for bookmarking (this is available for Amfora 
and eLinks browsers for example):
=> gemini://gemi.dev/gemini-mailing-list/messages/006818.gmi

FWIF, I intend to get around to transposing the discogs dataset into 
Gemini. Id be fascinated re how it could make use of stream links provided 
within the catalogues (such an undertaking would skew some of the 
statistical analyses of Gemini content).

====================
Jonathan McHugh
indieterminacy@libre.brussels

July 7, 2021 3:01 PM, gemproj@suckless.anonaddy.com wrote:

> Hello geminauts
> 
> Yesterday I decided to add a feed to my gemlog and when I checked other 
logs, most seem to feed XML
> or Atom. While I get that it's popular and useful in existing clients, I 
am wondering why it's the
> de facto standard in a protocol that favors a reduced markdown. XML 
always felt worse than HTML to
> me, yet to do anything feed related in geminispace, I still need to XML. Is it just me?
> Best
> ~m

Link to individual message.

---

Previous Thread: Gateway to DNS

Next Thread: how to submit multi-line long form text to gemini?