Do we need all three alternate rss feeds?

  • Resolved Christine Rondeau

    (@crondeau)


    14 years, 10 months ago

    Most themes have the following in the header.php file:

    <link rel="alternate" type="application/rss+xml" title="RSS 2.0" href="<?php bloginfo('rss2_url'); ?>" />
<link rel="alternate" type="text/xml" title="RSS .92" href="<?php bloginfo('rss_url'); ?>" />
<link rel="alternate" type="application/atom+xml" title="Atom 0.3" href="<?php bloginfo('atom_url'); ?>" />

    I’ve been told that the second and third links are no longer needed as these are an artifact of when browsers/feed readers sucked.

    Does anyone have any information on this? Should I be removing the second and third alternate feeds?

Viewing 1 replies (of 1 total)
  • esmi

    (@esmi)

    14 years, 10 months ago

    Atom is still a popular feed format. And, whilst RSS .92 has, in theory, been superseded by 2.0, quite few people still use .92 readers. So it makes sense to maximise propagation by using all three formats. And since all 3 feeds are “on demand” there’s no real downside.

Viewing 1 replies (of 1 total)
  • The topic ‘Do we need all three alternate rss feeds?’ is closed to new replies.