BlogMatrix
 

What Yahoo Problem?

edit David Janes 2005-01-12 21:42 UTC 7 comments  ·

Dave Winer wrote an entry yesterday titled "The solution to the Yahoo problem"

Yahoo sends emails to bloggers with RSS feeds saying, hey if you put this icon on your weblog you'll get more subscribers. It's true you will. Then Feedster says the same thing, and Bloglines, etc etc. Hey I did it too, back when Radio was pretty much the only show in town, you can see the icon to the right, if you click on it, it tries to open a page on your machine so you can subscribe to it. I could probably take the icon down by now, most Radio users probably are subscribed to Scripting News, since it is one of the defaults. But it's there for old time sake, for now.

Anyway, all those logos, when will it end? I can't imagine that Microsoft is far behind, and then someday soon CNN is going to figure out that they can have their own branded aggregator for their own users (call me if you want my help, I have some ideas about this) and then MSNBC will follow, and Fox, etc. Sheez even Best Buy and Circuit City will probably have a "Click here to subscribe to this in our aggregator" button before too long.

Now, from the point of view of Yahoo, there's no problem at all: there's free advertising, ease of use, so on and so forth. For CNN through Circuit City, the "problem" is that they didn't get there first, but boy, they'd love to be there (hypothetically speaking, of course).

From the point of view of information provider, it's a pain in the arse to provide all the appropriate icons. That is, assuming they're needed. Maybe you don't care if it's easy for people using the Circuit City aggregator to read your content or maybe there's a better way to do this anyway.

From the point of viewer of the reader, esthetically it's ugly and if your aggregator didn't make it to the list, you're ... hypothetically speaking, again ... back to cut and paste of URLs.

The reason I'm saying hypothetically is that there's already a great way to do this without creating some sort of centralized database, specializing URLs or whatever: drag and drop. I'm tooting my own horn here, but there's no reason that desktop should not provide the same service we do. Here's how we do subscription in Sparks! and Jäger:

  • click the URL of a page you're interested in ...
  • drag it to Sparks! (or Jäger)
  • drop it

That's it and that's all you should have to do. Our applications are smart enough to figure where the aggregation feed is and if there's ambiguity, you'll be further prompted. We don't even care if you get the home page (of a blog) or whatever, we've got about a 95% success rate figuring out "what you really mean" from any archive link on a blog. The only requirement on the part of the information provider is to add a "<link>" tag in the HTML header.

There's no need for those ugly RSS feed buttons – "my blog provides RSS brand syndication" is not much different that "my house use Ontario Power brand electricity". Who cares? RSS should be so everywhere there should be no need to point out its presence.

This doesn't cut out online aggregators either, though it's not as pretty. A Flash or Java drop target could be provided for dropping URLs, which I hope should do the trick.

Further comments:

  • Phil Ringnalda – with something that sounds about as complicated than Dave's idea
  • Ross Rader – who apparently is in Circuit City's boat and thinks it's a good idea

Addendum

If you're all really committed to making special markup to indicate RSS feeds, just make it "http://rsssubscribe?url=http://www.example.com/index.xml" and online aggregators and desktop aggregators can add an "rsssubscribe" entry /etc/hosts to redirect to your aggregator flavor. And you can still have Bryan Bell to design a cool icon.

Comment #1Bob Ippolito

2005-01-13 09:01:35
Uh, you should do it in a sane way and use feed:// like everyone else does. Modifying /etc/hosts is ridiculous!

See also:
http://nick.typepad.com/blog/2005/01/really_simple_s.html

Comment #2David

2005-01-13 14:44:12
I would have said exactly the opposite Bob! feed:// alwayes sounded like a horrible horrible hack to me. Using names to map to a service is elegant and simple. It wouldn't be necessary if URIs allowed the port field to be symbolically mapped (i.e. "http://localhost:rssmapper/") but it never came to be.

Comment #3David

2005-01-13 15:23:32
To go even further -- we are trying to apply an action/verb ("subscribe") to an object/noun (a RSS URL).

There's a very limited number of things one can do with VERB:NOUN as a syntax.

On the other hand:
http://VERB/?ID1=NOUN1 [&ID2=NOUN2...]
is wide open.

Comment #4David

2005-01-13 15:54:19
Of course, what would be really cool is to come up with a combination of both for universally specifying actions against URIs!

Comment #5Bob Ippolito

2005-01-13 21:45:08
Well what I'm saying is that a lot of other software uses feed:// *now*, so you should do the same rather than trying to hack the computer (modifing /etc/hosts, for example, requires ROOT ACCESS and fucks it up for EVERYONE on the system).

The grand solution is to use MIME types and perhaps a non-xml extension (for the benefit of browsers in the oh so common case of misconfigured servers). However, that is hard, and feed:// is easy.

Clicking on a feed link does NOT necessarily mean subscribe. In Tiger's Safari, for example, it will simply show you the current contents of the feed in its style. If you want to "subscribe", you can bookmark it from there.

Comment #6David

2005-01-13 22:18:12
I'm not sure why you're yelling at me Bob, but just to be clear:

(1)
I don't think marking up the feed URLs is necessary in _any_ case, which was the point of my posting.

(2)
The reason Sparks! and Jaeger don't support feed:// is I don't see it anywhere (for example, your page)! I'm quite agnostic to what people are doing or what someone thinks they should be doing ... if I see it, I'll implement it!

(3)
If you find modifying /etc/hosts so disturbing, consider it more of a metaphorical thing, and once again it becomes isomorphic in the amount of work to be done as implementing feed://

(4)
I don't know why I'm trying to convince you to do something that I think is suboptimal anyway, cf. point 1!

Comment #7Bob Ippolito

2005-01-13 22:22:45
I don't think it's necessary either, but I think what you have proposed in your blog is twelve times worse than the feed url scheme. feed:// is the easiest possible way to get an application that specializes in rss/atom feeds to handle a request, and it is already supported by several clients. That's all I'm saying.

Add Comment