PHP.NET's RSS Feed and Firefox
Moderator: General Moderators
- Ambush Commander
- DevNet Master
- Posts: 3698
- Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:29 pm
- Location: New Jersey, US
PHP.NET's RSS Feed and Firefox
Is it just me, or did PHP.NET's RSS feed stop parsing correctly in Firefox 1.5? (actually, I think this has been going on for a while)
- AKA Panama Jack
- Forum Regular
- Posts: 878
- Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2005 4:21 pm
Works just fine in Opera. 
Re: PHP.NET's RSS Feed and Firefox
Its not Firefox. The feed is no longer valid:Ambush Commander wrote:Is it just me, or did PHP.NET's RSS feed stop parsing correctly in Firefox 1.5? (actually, I think this has been going on for a while)
http://feedvalidator.org/check.cgi?url= ... 2Fnews.rss
The XML spec encourages authors to be conservative in what they accept, so Firefox is just following the rules.
Contact the PHP group and let them know.
- AKA Panama Jack
- Forum Regular
- Posts: 878
- Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2005 4:21 pm
Actually if you really check out the syntax the feed validator site is misinterpreting the feed.
The RDF:About flag is wrong in this case as it is interpreting the <item rdf:about= ...> improperly in the context it is being used. The other error is another mistake by the feed validator. It is interpreting — as it it were something like because it is bracketed by an & and ; without spaces. If it was & mdash; then it would pass. It's a programming fault on the validators side.
You will find stand alone RSS viewers along with Opera interpret the feed properly.
Online validators are not 100% perfect.
The RDF:About flag is wrong in this case as it is interpreting the <item rdf:about= ...> improperly in the context it is being used. The other error is another mistake by the feed validator. It is interpreting — as it it were something like because it is bracketed by an & and ; without spaces. If it was & mdash; then it would pass. It's a programming fault on the validators side.
You will find stand alone RSS viewers along with Opera interpret the feed properly.
Online validators are not 100% perfect.
You may be right on it being a fault, but not on the reasoning.AKA Panama Jack wrote:The RDF:About flag is wrong in this case as it is interpreting the <item rdf:about= ...> improperly in the context it is being used. The other error is another mistake by the feed validator. It is interpreting — as it it were something like because it is bracketed by an & and ; without spaces. If it was & mdash; then it would pass. It's a programming fault on the validators side.
It wouldn't pass if it was & mdash; - that wouldnt be valid, as that is not a valid character entity (Check the XML entity list - there can be no spaces inside). However, it does seem to be flagging the entity incorrectly. I can only guess, based on the output, that it is because there is no *leading* space before the entity begins, and after it ends. That seems dumb.
Submit some feedback on the issue on their mailing list to help them improve: http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/list ... ator-users
Regardless, thats only the second error. The first error (duplicating the about field) is accurate, and should cause an error in any compliant viewer.
Neither are browsers including Opera.AKA Panama Jack wrote:Online validators are not 100% perfect.
- AKA Panama Jack
- Forum Regular
- Posts: 878
- Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2005 4:21 pm
Actually, they are treating it like an entity and they shouldn't.Roja wrote:It wouldn't pass if it was & mdash; - that wouldnt be valid, as that is not a valid character entity (Check the XML entity list - there can be no spaces inside). However, it does seem to be flagging the entity incorrectly. I can only guess, based on the output, that it is because there is no *leading* space before the entity begins, and after it ends. That seems dumb.
And the second one is NOT accurate because each rdb:about is in a different item and it should NOT be flagged as a duplicate.Roja wrote:Regardless, thats only the second error. The first error (duplicating the about field) is accurate, and should cause an error in any compliant viewer.
Why shouldn't they? (&)mdash (; ) is a defined xml entity.AKA Panama Jack wrote:Actually, they are treating it like an entity and they shouldn't.
No, even in a different item, the spec says you cannot have duplicate about's.AKA Panama Jack wrote:And the second one is NOT accurate because each rdb:about is in a different item and it should NOT be flagged as a duplicate.