in reply to Problems with HTML Encoding in RSS after moving to XML::RSS 1.48

Those two lines are 100% equivalent. There seems to be a bug in your expectations.

  • Comment on Re: Problems with HTML Encoding in RSS after moving to XML::RSS 1.48

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Problems with HTML Encoding in RSS after moving to XML::RSS 1.48
by camelreader (Initiate) on Oct 22, 2010 at 18:41 UTC
    Okay, if I save the 2nd one to a static RSS file the rendered result in Firefox is equivalent. However when I deliver them via a script with Content-Type application/rss+xml the rendered results in Firefox are not equivalent. The 1.48 version displays the HTML tags as text rather than rendering them. Is the content-type a problem when combined with this encoding?
[reply]
[d/l]

      I wonder about which renderer you are really talking about. I think Firefox itself doesn't render RSS. Whatever renderer it is, it appears to be buggy. < and < are equivalent in XML like 'abc' and "abc" are equivalent in Perl.

      A browser can't tell the difference between a static file and a generated file, so there is another difference. That difference is probably the real problem.

[reply]
[d/l]
[select]

        Maybe the "problem" is that the closing angle brackets are not respectively are HTML-encoded (> vs >)? My short forays into generating HTML content for RSS make me think that all HTML needs to be entity-encoded so the XML remains valid, at least I (actually, XML::RSS::SimpleGen) do so with my Image photo stream RSS. You can add this as as "Smart bookmarks" in Firefox, which I think is how one could use Firefox as RSS reader. But without deeper knowledge and experience of RSS, I don't know.

        Personally, I consider the full-encoded RSS to be "more valid".

[reply]
[d/l]
[select]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom