News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Feeds Are Not Fit for Gardening by kazinator on Sunday March 31, 2024 @02:19AM (#39881898)
> That in turn means that the existing feed specifications serve reasonably well to publish new items but very poorly to notify subscribers about changes to existing items.

That's a jaw-dropping misunderstanding. RSS items are not the content; they are notifications for something else. The content is elsewhere. When you have some content-object that changes, those changes appear as a train of RSS items. The RSS item is not the thing that it's about.

Your expectations and mental model are wrong, not the feed semantics.

Re:Feeds Are Not Fit for Gardening by sseagull on Sunday March 31, 2024 @07:34AM (#39883291)
I think this take is not really correct, althouth it is the “modern” way RSS is used. You can have the content in the RSS feeds, and some sites do (I am pretty sure axios does this).

I think what really prevents this is the ad-driven web, and a focus on fancy web tech over more-plain text content.

Re:Feeds Are Not Fit for Gardening by sseagull on Sunday March 31, 2024 @10:41AM (#39884710)
Not sure why the downvotes. The RSS feed for Axios does indeed include the entire story. Check for yourself: https://api.axios.com/feed/top/

It's very convenient to have that all incorporated into your RSS reader. The only thing really stopping more sites from doing this is ad revenue.

Re:Feeds Are Not Fit for Gardening by maxcoder4 on Sunday March 31, 2024 @11:52AM (#39885343)
I know, for example by blog does it too. But it doesn't change the fact that RSS is for notifications, not (primarily) for distributing content.