aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorJoey Hess <joey@kitenet.net>2013-06-26 20:59:44 -0400
committerJoey Hess <joey@kitenet.net>2013-06-26 20:59:44 -0400
commitef95c1f21d3136b8756d7915c776ca85ae4c027a (patch)
treee776ac80caae41dca02b04b864279bbe2c3f71f1
parent782ad9f4c3a7802f9bd843fa5864e413d587c2b9 (diff)
downloadikiwiki-ef95c1f21d3136b8756d7915c776ca85ae4c027a.tar
ikiwiki-ef95c1f21d3136b8756d7915c776ca85ae4c027a.tar.gz
response
-rw-r--r--doc/todo/fancypodcast.mdwn12
1 files changed, 12 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/todo/fancypodcast.mdwn b/doc/todo/fancypodcast.mdwn
index 21aadf1f7..12ca43d53 100644
--- a/doc/todo/fancypodcast.mdwn
+++ b/doc/todo/fancypodcast.mdwn
@@ -249,6 +249,10 @@ normally no reason to do that. Why does it need an url of this form here?
> way at the time. If you have a better idea, I'm happy to hear it;
> if not, I'll add an explanatory comment. --[[schmonz]]
+>> I would be more comfortable with this if two two different forms of url
+>> you need were both generated by calling urlto. It'd be fine to call
+>> it more than once. --[[Joey]]
+
+<TMPL_IF HTML5><section id="inlineenclosure"><TMPL_ELSE><div id="inlineenclosure"></TMPL_IF>
+<TMPL_IF ENCLOSURE>
@@ -286,6 +290,12 @@ could negatively impact eg, Planet style aggregators using ikiwiki. --[[Joey]]
> really prefer the old behavior (or don't want to take any chances)?
> --[[schmonz]]
+>> A specific example I know of is updo.debian.net, when used with
+>> rss2email. Without the author name there, one cannot see who posted
+>> an item. It's worth noting that planet.debian.org does the same thing
+>> with its rss feed. (That's probably what I copied.) Atom feeds may
+>> not have this problem, don't know. --[[Joey]]
+
+++ b/templates/rsspage.tmpl
+ xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
+<atom:link href="<TMPL_VAR FEEDURL>" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
@@ -309,3 +319,5 @@ Does this added tag provide any benefits? --[[Joey]]
> arrived only in RSS 2.0, but that's already the version we're
> claiming to be, and it's over a decade old. Seems much less risky
> than the atom namespace bits. --[[schmonz]]
+
+>> Sounds ok then. --[[Joey]]