#51 Incorrect media type warning

open
nobody
Atom (11)
5
2005-11-07
2005-11-07
James Holderness
No

Should the validator not provide a warning (at the very
least) when the HTTP content-type header for an Atom
feed is something other than application/atom+xml?

According to the spec (section 2): Atom documents are
[...] identified with the "application/atom+xml" media
type.

I don't know if that's enough to justify an error, but
unless something is said about it, we're never going to
get one-click subscription working.

Discussion

  • Joseph Walton
    Joseph Walton
    2005-11-13

    Logged In: YES
    user_id=847250

    Current behaviour is to accept the Atom media type or either
    of the generic XML types. For interoperability
    (specifically, at least, viewing in Mozilla browsers), there
    are good reasons for using the more generic types until a
    fix for
    <https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=155730> is
    implemented and widely deployed.

    It's a pragmatic decision, certainly, so there's room for
    debate.Does this seem reasonable?

     
  • Logged In: YES
    user_id=1371743

    Assuming Phil is right in comment #33, I don't see what the
    big deal is about that "bug". If the user has as an Atom
    aggregator installed there isn't a problem at all. And if they
    don't, well then I'm not really sure how seeing a page full of
    incomprehensible XML is going to be any more useful to your
    average end user than a save dialog. It looks like a geek
    feature request to me.

    Either way, I don't see what this has to do with the feed
    validator. Either this is a violation of the Atom spec or it isn't.
    Bugs in other people's software shouldn't come into it at all. If
    it's wrong there should be an error or warning. Many servers
    have problems serving the correct charset and most
    aggregators simply ignore it, but that doesn't stop the
    validator pointing out charset errors when they occur.