RE: Atom Info Proposal

["Danny Ayers" <danny666@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I like it.

> As the guy who invented the white-on-orange XML buttons, may I respond to
> your proposal?
>
> Assuming so.
>
> I think you're on a slippery slope. The nicer you make it look in
> a browser
> through CSS, the *more* confusing it gets.

I disagree - the info message tells you a lot more than a page of raw XML.
I don't really see the relevance of the [XML] icon - it can stay where it is
if you like, it's just that the data it links to will either display as
source code or nicely formatted data.

> No one is going to understand what the heck is going on, not even the
> techies who might find a complicated XML source display somewhat
> intriguing.

"This is an Atom formatted XML site feed. It is intended to be viewed in a
Newsreader or syndicated to another site. Please visit
www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/ for more info."

or

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
...

I know which would make more sense to Auntie Mary.

> The non-techies, of course won't know or care and won't get it and neither
> will the techies.
>
> You said that most people who use aggregators will use auto-discovery,
> assuming this is true, you don't need an XML button at all. It
> could be that
> the white-on-orange buttons were only needeed to help bootstrap XML-based
> syndication, and it could be that they've outlived their purpose,
> esp since
> (if what you say is true) most people don't use them to subscribe.
> Personally I do use them, but I'm sort of unique. I understood
> these things
> before any actually existed. ;->

The button is just a hack (albeit one that has been useful). In terms of the
information delivered [XML] it's meaningless to people that aren't in the
know. To people that are in the know, autodiscovery should do away with the
need for a visible link most of the time. But people can land on feed data
through other means. For example, Google "scripting rss".

> I would suggest in this case doing some actual user testing. Put
> a real user
> in front of a few websites, some with the white-on-orange buttons some
> without and see who gets confused, and ask them to explain (the
> ones who got
> confused).

What are you expecting the users to do/understand?

> But making the XML look pretty is not a great idea, because it obfuscates
> what's going on, and obfuscation, imho, is always a bad idea.

But Jason's suggestion does exactly the opposite - there is meaningful data
there, this technique not only displays the data in a meaningful fashion but
also explains its purpose. Otherwise you just get the data obfuscated (as
XML syntax).

Or should e.g. image data be displayed as a screenful of hex?

Cheers,
Danny.