Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
At 9:10 PM -0800 1/13/04, Dare Obasanjo wrote: >Some would consider such mailings a denial of service attack, I'd >agree with them. I was half-joking (but only half, how does one type half a smiley face?). The main problem I see with this idea is that it would be too easy for a popular webmaster to deliberately break their feed while pointing the webmaster address at somebody else's inbox to launch a DOS attack. Don Park has a less aggressive suggestion <http://www.docuverse.com/blog/donpark/EntryViewPage.aspx?guid=b8d11d41-7b90-489f-8f68-bedb2b05ddd2>: I believe the spec should be strict and implementations should be liberal yet *visibly distinguish* good feeds from bad ones. Badly formed feeds should be displayed with 'broken' icons and posts should be displayed with a header or footer message clearly indicating that the feed data is bad. This should reduce or at least limit proliferation of bad feeds. -- Elliotte Rusty Harold elharo@m... Effective XML (Addison-Wesley, 2003) http://www.cafeconleche.org/books/effectivexml http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0321150406/ref%3Dnosim/cafeaulaitA
|
