abdera-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Garrett Rooney" <roo...@electricjellyfish.net>
Subject Re: DOCTYPE declaration causing WstxUnexpectedCharException
Date Thu, 13 Nov 2008 18:34:47 GMT
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 1:28 PM, Bruce Snyder <bruce.snyder@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 11:02 AM, Garrett Rooney
> <rooneg@electricjellyfish.net> wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 11:43 AM, Bruce Snyder <bruce.snyder@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 9:25 AM, Garrett Rooney
>>> <rooneg@electricjellyfish.net> wrote:
>>>> Does the document actually have a <feed> element at it's root?  That's
>>>> the kind of error you'd get if you parsed (for example) an Atom
>>>> <entry> instead of an Atom <feed>.
>>> Yep, it sure does. I'm just using the Google News Atom URL for my testing:
>>> http://news.google.com/?output=atom
>> That's the problem.  That's an atom 0.3 feed, abdera only supports the
>> actual 1.0 standard.  The namespaces are different, which is why it
>> doesn't think it's the right kind of document.  It wouldn't be
>> impossible to add support for 0.3, but it doesn't do it yet.
> Damn :-(.
> Would it be difficult for Abdera to support other Atom versions by
> just poking the feed and then deciding which parser version to use?

Well, I know you could do it by adding the old elements as essentially
an extension, but that's a fair amount of work, as you'd be adding a
lot of classes and essentially duplicating a lot of work that's
already done for the 1.0 version.  Not sure if there's an easier way,
maybe convincing the existing code to accept either namespace.  It's
hard to say what the cost/benefit would be here, as atom 0.3 does seem
to be going away relatively quickly.


View raw message