response
parent
782ad9f4c3
commit
ef95c1f21d
|
@ -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;
|
> 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]]
|
> 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 HTML5><section id="inlineenclosure"><TMPL_ELSE><div id="inlineenclosure"></TMPL_IF>
|
||||||
+<TMPL_IF ENCLOSURE>
|
+<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)?
|
> really prefer the old behavior (or don't want to take any chances)?
|
||||||
> --[[schmonz]]
|
> --[[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
|
+++ b/templates/rsspage.tmpl
|
||||||
+ xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
|
+ xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
|
||||||
+<atom:link href="<TMPL_VAR FEEDURL>" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
|
+<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
|
> 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
|
> claiming to be, and it's over a decade old. Seems much less risky
|
||||||
> than the atom namespace bits. --[[schmonz]]
|
> than the atom namespace bits. --[[schmonz]]
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
>> Sounds ok then. --[[Joey]]
|
||||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue