I just read Jon Udell's post on What RSS users want: consistent one-click subscription where he wrote

Saturday's Scripting News asked an important question: What do users want from RSS? The context of the question is the upcoming RSS Winterfest... Over the weekend I received a draft of the RSS Winterfest agenda along with a In an October posting from BloggerCon I present video testimony from several of them who make it painfully clear that the most basic publishing and subscribing tasks aren't yet nearly simple enoughrequest for feedback. Here's mine: focus on users. .

Here's more testimony from the comments attached to Dave's posting:

One message: MAKE IT SIMPLE. I've given up on trying to get RSS. My latest attempt was with Friendster: I pasted in the "coffee cup" and ended up with string of text in my sidebar. I was lost and gave up. I'm fed up with trying to get RSS. I don't want to understand RSS. I'm not interested in learning it. I just want ONE button to press that gives me RSS.... [Ingrid Jones]

Like others, I'd say one-click subscription is a must-have. Not only does this make it easier for users, it makes it easier to sell RSS to web site owners as a replacement/enhancement for email newsletters... [Derek Scruggs]

For average users RSS is just too cumbersome. What is needed to make is simpler to subscribe is something analog to the mailto tag. The user would just click on the XML or RSS icon, the RSS reader would pop up and would ask the user if he wants to add this feed to his subscription list. A simple click on OK would add the feed and the reader would confirm it and quit. The user would be back on the web site right where he was before. [Christoph Jaggi]

Considering that the most popular news aggregators for both the Mac and Windows platforms support the feed "URI" scheme including  SharpReader, RSS Bandit, NewsGator, FeedDemon (in next release), NetNewsWire, Shrook, WinRSS and Vox Lite I wonder how long it'll take the various vendors of blogging tools to wake up and smell the coffee. Hopefully by the end of the year, complaints like those listed above will be a thing of the past.


 

Tuesday, 20 January 2004 16:40:33 (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Hi Dare,

The major problem, it seems to me, is to get from a Web page with an orange icon into a feedreader. That's where people get stuck.

I just checked, and neither RSS Bandit nor NetNewsWire launches in response to a feed:// URI invoked from the browser.

Is that even possible? Or kosher?

- Jon
Jon Udell
Tuesday, 20 January 2004 18:10:36 (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
>I just checked, and neither RSS Bandit nor NetNewsWire launches in response to a feed:// URI invoked from the browser.


Works for me. I clicked a hyperlink to feed:http://www.25hoursaday.com/rss091.xml in my browser and it launched RSS Bandit. What version of RSS Bandit are you using?

>Is that even possible? Or kosher?

Yes. Why not?
Tuesday, 20 January 2004 18:16:02 (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Besides the fact that the "feed" scheme isn't registered, and current W3C TAG opinion seems to be that a better approach would be to dispatch on content-type?

Julian
Julian Reschke
Wednesday, 21 January 2004 02:09:37 (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Dare: I downloaded 1.2.0.61 today, and it doesn't seem to have the behavior.

Is there a systemwide hook for URI schemes in Windows, BTW?

- Jon
Jon Udell
Wednesday, 21 January 2004 02:57:17 (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Jon,
It should have this behavior. In testing it on my machine, I'm seeing some weirdness which I'll ping Torsten about when he gets online later today.

As for ways to specify handlers for specific URI schemes in Windows see http://msdn.microsoft.com/workshop/networking/pluggable/overview/appendix_a.asp
Wednesday, 21 January 2004 09:07:19 (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Dare: It isn't so much a matter of "waking up"... some of us just have limited control over that sort of thing.

For example, I just added feed: links to JournURL's default blog templates. But that's about the best I can do... existing users will need to modify their templates manually. And sadly, I doubt most will bother. Other blogapp developers are probably in a similar position.
Thursday, 22 January 2004 21:40:16 (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Feasible? - perhaps, in a limited sense - it's hard to imagine this working cross-platform *and* cross application (e.g. how will MS Outlook handle feed: URIs?).

Kosher? - Not at all. Note Julian's comments. But basically it's not really an identifier as such, just a hook to pass the identifier to the app registry. A URI scheme is a square peg here as far as the web architecture is concerned. Ok, maybe mime type handlers or whatever are problematic in practice, and maybe feed: might work in a lot of cases, but that doesn't make it a good solution.
Friday, 23 January 2004 22:26:41 (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Conceptually, it's not all too different from mailto: which has been used in hyperlinks by common folks for years. Personally, I think whether this gains traction or not, it is a good thing for Dare and others to push the envelope on this issue. I can't see that anything to improve the adoption of RSS by the common person as bad.
Saturday, 24 January 2004 22:20:00 (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
The feed: proposal does not address users of web-based aggregators like Bloglines, FeedOnFeeds and the like.

It would be a good idea to specify a web-based (e.g. REST-ful) interface for web-based aggregators to allow registration.

We can then have a generic feed: handler for web-based aggregators. That way, the user can specify his or her aggregator's subscribe URL in the preferences for the generic aggregator. This would avoid having each web-based aggregator have to write their own feed handlers for Windows, OS X, Linux and so on.
Saturday, 24 January 2004 22:21:49 (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
The feed: proposal does not address users of web-based aggregators like Bloglines, FeedOnFeeds and the like.

It would be a good idea to specify a web-based (e.g. REST-ful) interface for web-based aggregators to allow registration.

We can then have a generic feed: handler for web-based aggregators. That way, the user can specify his or her aggregator's subscribe URL in the preferences for the generic aggregator. This would avoid having each web-based aggregator have to write their own feed handlers for Windows, OS X, Linux and so on.
Saturday, 24 January 2004 22:25:32 (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
The feed: proposal does not address users of web-based aggregators like Bloglines, FeedOnFeeds and the like.

It would be a good idea to specify a web-based (e.g. REST-ful) interface for web-based aggregators to allow registration.

We can then have a generic feed: handler for web-based aggregators. That way, the user can specify his or her aggregator's subscribe URL in the preferences for the generic aggregator. This would avoid having each web-based aggregator have to write their own feed handlers for Windows, OS X, Linux and so on.
Saturday, 24 January 2004 22:28:13 (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)
Sorry about the duplicate - there were some server problems when I first submitted.
Comments are closed.