Search First! Then browse:
Categories |
Full Archive |
By Date |
Newsletter
•
Listen to the podcast: Full feeds, or not full feeds?.
Related:
Ask Leo! - So just what is RSS, and why should I care?
Ask Leo! - What rights do I retain when I publish an RSS feed?
Ask Leo! - What is 'podcasting'?
Article C2398 - August 4, 2005
I just wanted to say that subscribers to a web site could get a full feed for a very small fee. Most people likely wouldn't find it worth it and thus do the site, but those of us who frequently read feeds on out handheld devices (mine is a Tungsten T3 running QuickNews) aren't in a position to be constantly connected, so paying a small fee for the ability to have everything I need right there seems to me to be the best way to do it and well in the tradition of the Internet. You can get stuff for free and you can get what you want.
Posted by: David at August 5, 2005 2:11 PMRE full feed vs not full feed...
Might I suggest that only the short version is sent in the RSS feed, and the local RSS application have an option to traverse the source link so it can cache the desired article, (by default I would suggest that this this is turned off). In this manner it is the RSS application on the client side and the client themself who determines whether or not the full article is locally cached.
Posted by: Chuck at August 9, 2005 12:16 AM