Because RSS and Atom weren't enough...

[PJH]

... and in the spirit of xkcd://standards, we now have..

JSON Feed

Wherein we learn that

JSON is [...] less prone to bugs.

and

[the spec is] at version 1, which may be the only version ever needed.

[RaceProUK]

JSON is simpler to read and write,

I can buy that.

and it’s less prone to bugs.

No. Just, no.

It’s at version 1, which may be the only version ever needed.

Coming soon: version 2.

[lucas1]

Have they just specced out doing this?

public class RSStoJSON
{
    public RSStoJSON(string url)
    {
        using (WebClient client = new WebClient())
        {
            string xml = client.DownloadString(url);
                
            XmlDocument doc = new XmlDocument();

            doc.LoadXml(xml);
                
            JSON = JsonConvert.SerializeXmlNode(doc);
        }
    }

    public string JSON
    {
        get;
    }
}

I know this isn't good C# ...

[PJH]

JSON Feed - JSON Feed Version 1

Note about plain text: on this page it means “not HTML” — emojis, for instance, are considered plain text.

Ò_o

url (optional, string) is the URL of the resource described by the item. It’s the permalink. This may be the same as the id — but should be present regardless.

The 'spec' is full of this sort of thing. "This is optional, but must be there." "This is mandatory, but you can omit it."

Oh look, another:

content_html and content_text are each optional strings — but one or both must be present.

I somehow think the author is unaware of things like RFCs. Or peer review before publishing.

[Arantor]

@PJH plain text including emoji is cromulent. It just means no HTML or entities. But since emoji is in the same overall category as, say, Unicode text it is cromulent even if our reaction is .

[sh_code]

@PJH
Jeah, SON, more useless and needless APIs!

[dkf]

@Arantor said in Because RSS and Atom weren't enough...:

It just means no HTML or entities.

Either the text is plain text or it isn't. If it is just plain text, you can't forbid <, > or &. If the parties in the communication agree, there's no reason that they couldn't reinterpret the plain text as something else.

[Arantor]

@dkf I assumed these would also be treated as plain text and have no semantic meaning. But the author of the "spec" couldn't write a spec properly...

[masonwheeler]

@PJH said in Because RSS and Atom weren't enough...:

content_html and content_text are each optional strings — but one or both must be present.

I somehow think the author is unaware of things like RFCs. Or peer review before publishing.

The two options are each individually optional, but at least one of the two must be present. That doesn't look contradictory to me.

[Arantor]

@masonwheeler It isn't outright contradictory but it is really badly worded, like the whole thing is really poorly thought out.

Oh wai--

[PJH]

It's spreading....

JSON Feed Announced As Alternative To RSS - Slashdot

Reader Anubis IV writes: With Slashdot recently asking whether we still use RSS, it may come as a surprise that something interesting has happened in the world of news feeds this week. JSON Feed was launched as an alternative to RSS and Atom, eschewing the XML they rely on -- which is frequently...

[Arantor]

@PJH I'll give the post one point: most RSS feeds are malformed and difficult to parse because feed generators mangle shite in. Not convinced JSON Feed will fix that, either.

[dkf]

@Arantor said in Because RSS and Atom weren't enough...:

Not convinced JSON Feed will fix that, either.

Convinced it won't. Because SNAFU rules.