Atomizer improvements #93 #94 #95

[emmanuelbernard]

Fixes for issues #93 #94 #95

[tcurdt]

I would propose s/blog/feed/ as it not always have to be a blog ...and maybe we should make the "..." postfix an option, too?

[emmanuelbernard]

@tcurdt Good idea on feed, I'll make the change. About making an options of ..., I am not sure, all the Awestruct sites I have checked end up with ...... at the end of the <summarize> element.

Also, I am having some issues with my feed on Google Reader, I want that to settle down to be sure my change in #93 is not causing it.

[tcurdt]

Ah, the summarize function probably adds those "..." then. +1 to just remove them then.
Let me know how Google Reader likes the new feed.

[emmanuelbernard]

hey @tcurdt , I am reworking #95 to rename blog_url and blog_title to use the feed prefix. I realize that feed_url would be a very confusing name. I can think of:

1. feed_content_url
2. content_url

I think 2. is good. Any other suggestion?

[lance]

I put my vote in for 2 as well.

[emmanuelbernard]

I have rebased my branch with a new version of these commits:

• the atom feed has been tested with Google Reader and NetNewsWire and fixed
• the Atomizer params are now feed_title and content_url

It's good to go

[tcurdt]

@emmanuelbernard good point about the naming. But don't you you think a common prefix would be clearer?

site_url
site_title

or

content_url
content_title

[emmanuelbernard]

Definitely not site_ulr, site_title as you can have more than one feed per site.
We could use content_title instead of feed_title but I don't think that conveys the truth. It's not a title for the content, it's a title for the feed. And it's not a url to the feed but a url to the content used to generate the feed.

To me it's better as it is. What do others think?

[tcurdt]

Hm. Again true. I think feed_title is just the right name. Still not convinced about the content_url though. Anyway ... merging for now.