Atom 1.0 feed bugs in WordPress 2.2. -was- Re: [wp-hackers] WP issues

[Lloyd Budd]

On 5/31/07, Geoffrey Sneddon <foolistbar at googlemail.com> wrote:

Wow, there is a great deal of excellent information here! Though
making it somewhat negative towards Matt doesn't really help anyone.
(Nor having a non-descript subject line ;-))

> 2. Having waited years for an Atom 1.0 feed to be offered:

<Snipped a) , because larger non-implementation issue >

>         b) Uses RFC 822 dates (what part of section 3.3 of RFC 4287[RFC4287]
> is unclear?).
>         c) Uses @content for <link> (where did that come from? There's no
> @content in the entire spec! Please see @href, section 4.2.7.1
> [RFC4287].).
>         d) Claims that the blog title is a MIME type, and when the feed is
> meant to link to itself it links to the RSS 2.0 feed (what's unclear
> in section 4.2.7.2 of RFC 4287[RFC4287]?).
>
> Those four issues are just from a quick glance at the above mentioned
> feed. Seeming so many of these things are CLEARLY wrong, it looks as
> if the person who implemented it had NEVER read the Atom 1.0 spec,
> RFC 4287[RFC4287].

Ouch, bite the hand that feeds you -- in this case maybe even your own hand.

I guess you are saying that Sam Ruby has not read the spec either then.
http://intertwingly.net/blog/2007/01/24/WordPress-and-Atom-1-0

Anyway, what is really at issue here is that we all make mistakes,
lets learn from them, and correct them as we have the opportunity to.

I am happy to file the bugs for the issues you identify here, but if
you are able to that would be even better because you have a *much*
better comprehension of the issues.

All the best,
-- 
Lloyd Budd | Digital Entomologist | 250-885-1744
WordPress.com | WordPress.org | Automattic.com