I haven’t tried the plugin called Podcasting so I dunno.
I’ve figured out that your RSS (which only accepts 1 enclosure) will usually grab the 1st enclosure listed top-to-bottom in your custom fields. It’s the first enclosure that was written as a Custom Field whether by your plugin or by WP auto-enclosing a .mp3 link.
The easiest place to delete extra enclosures post by post, by hand, is again, in your Edit Post > Advanced > Custom Fields area.
Your Atom feed will take multiple enclosures per post i believe. But that’s not for sending to iTunes.
RSS 2.0 specifies that there can be only one enclosure per item, so this concerns me a bit in that some catchers might get hung up on it. I’m also concerned that iTunes might grab the wrong file (one of the linked to MP3s rather than my show).
I’m well aware the RSS spec specifies only one enclosure per item. This has been a heavily debated topic, and I choose to follow WordPress’ native support of multiple enclosures.
As a rule of thumb, iTunes will pick up the first added file for a given format. So essentially, each post can have multiple files each assigned to a different format and work fine. The problem lies when two or more files are added to the same format. That’s when iTunes (and other podcatchers) will only use the first file.
RSS 2.0 specifies that there can be only one enclosure per item
Actually, it doesn’t.
However, Dave Winer has said that he intended one enclosure per item, but nobody else agrees with him and virtually all serious podcast systems not only include more than one enclosure, but almost all podcast readers support multiple enclosures just fine.
The unstated but de-facto convention is that multiple enclosures in a single item represent different formats of the same content. So if I post an M4A and an MP3 in the same item element, then those are the same thing in two encodings.
Anyway, in the long run, RSS is now a dead spec. ATOM is the wave of the future. It’s a standard, it works for publishing as well as syndication, and it’s actively developed. It’s only a matter of time before podcast readers start supporting it properly, and then it will take off and RSS can finally die.
Actually, it doesn’t.
Be that as it may (FWIW, I think you’re wrong), it is not the way I want for my feed to format. First off, I don’t want to feed something that isn’t my content. Secondly, I don’t want to flood a reader with up to 12 enclosures. And third…
The unstated but de-facto convention is that multiple enclosures in a single item represent different formats of the same content.
As I said, each post will have a podcast which I produce and links to MP3 files (a requirement of the people providing music to me for my show); not different formats of the same content.
I think what I’m going to do is just refeed using Feeder. A few more steps than I really wanted to take, but at least the end result is what I want.
I’ll mark the thread “resolved,” but I’d like to recommend that rather than telling people they’re doing it wrong; the developers of WP and plugins consider solutions to their users desires. Crazy idea, I know.
FWIW, I think you’re wrong
You can think anything you like, but this is not a matter of opinion. I linked to the actual official specification, please point out where that specification explicitly states that you must have a maximum of one enclosure per item.
The fact of the matter is that WordPress supports multiple enclosures per item. So does every other major blogging application. There is no easy way to prevent this from working, because it’s a feature, not a bug.
As I said, each post will have a podcast which I produce and links to MP3 files (a requirement of the people providing music to me for my show); not different formats of the same content.
If those links are relative (instead of complete http: links), then WordPress won’t turn them into enclosures. It only works with full links.
I’ll mark the thread “resolved,” but I’d like to recommend that rather than telling people they’re doing it wrong; the developers of WP and plugins consider solutions to their users desires. Crazy idea, I know.
Telling people that they’re doing it wrong is often the right answer. What, you’d prefer that we give you the wrong answer? For everything that you can do, there is a right way, and there is a wrong way.
And what the user “desires” is irrelevant, because the user often doesn’t have the correct method in mind. He certainly has a goal in mind, but the correct route to that goal is often different than the user thinks.
Wow.
And what the user “desires” is irrelevant…
Your opinions are pretty much irrelevant to my problem.
For everything that you can do, there is a right way, and there is a wrong way.
And your approach to answering my questions is the wrong way.
Your opinions are pretty much irrelevant to my problem.
No, in point of fact, they’re not. I tried to assist you by pointing out why you were wrong and trying to change your mind on the subject. Since you seem to be unreceptive to open discussion, I suggest you take your problems elsewhere in the future, since we encourage free discussion here in these forums.
