Home > All Posts > Individual Post
Post #1448

Re: [videoblogging] Anyone using an RSS 2.0 feed with enclosures?

By Joshua Kinberg | Joshua Kinberg <jkinberg@...> | joshkinberg
October 20, 2004 | Post #1448 | Topic #1425

> Either there will be enclosures for every > item, or there won't be enclosures at all. It's not cool for those who > can't get their videos in the enclosures (because people with > enclosure-supporting aggregators would easily miss their videos). This certainly makes sense for the videoblogging.info feed. But, for my own blog, I may not have a video included with every entry. Some entries may be just text, or other stuff. So, it would make sense to only use enclosures where appropriate. > The first two should be included in enclosures, the last one shouldn't > (because it's just a normal link). If that's how Brandon Fuller's plugin > works it's not a very cool plugin. I don't want my photos/movies > distributed directly in someone else's feed just because they linked to me. This is a good point. So I checked the documentation on the plugin here: http://brandon.fuller.name/archives/hacks/mtenclosures/ He actually added a "remote" parameter: "Remote vs. local is determined by comparing the URL of the enclosure file with the URL of your weblog from your weblog's configuration" There's also a Pinging feature that pings audio.weblogs.com when you post an audio file, or podcast. --Josh On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 17:16:08 +0200, Andreas Haugstrup <videoblog@...> wrote: > > On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 11:00:09 -0400, Joshua Kinberg <jkinberg@...> > wrote: > > >> we'd end up with half the entries with > >> enclosures, half without. > > > > Half is better than none. > > Half is worse than none. It's misleading when you have a feed that's > supposed to contain videos. Either there will be enclosures for every > item, or there won't be enclosures at all. It's not cool for those who > can't get their videos in the enclosures (because people with > enclosure-supporting aggregators would easily miss their videos). > > > Couldn't you have it look for video files in the blog entry -- not the > > HTML page of that entry's permalink. That's how Brandon Fuller's > > MT-Enclosures plugin works for MovableType, more or less. > > I couldn't but it's a very bad solution. It would be impossible to > distinguish these links: > > <a href="movie.mov">Watch my video</a> > <a href="http://www.domain.com/movie.mov">Watch my video that I hosted > somewhere else</a> > <a href="http://www.anotherdomain.com/movie.mov">Watch this cool movie my > friend made</a> > > The first two should be included in enclosures, the last one shouldn't > (because it's just a normal link). If that's how Brandon Fuller's plugin > works it's not a very cool plugin. I don't want my photos/movies > distributed directly in someone else's feed just because they linked to me. > > - Andreas > > -- > > > Personal: <http://www.solitude.dk&gt; > File Thingie - PHP File Manager <http://www.solitude.dk/filethingie/&gt; > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > >