16 February 2007

Blogger feeds re-ordering #

Edit: As the comment by Pete goes, Blogger has added an orderby query string, that can take two values, namely published or updated, depending on how you want your feed ordered. This cuts out Pipes out of the equation as of now, and hence remove the overhead being added. Go Blogger! :)

You could call it Blogger Feed Corrector part deux! :) Carrying over from Ramani's post, I have worked up a new pipe which will re-order the feed coming out of Blogger, sorted in descending order (latest to earliest) of the published date.

This pipe comes because of the bug being filed by Ramani (which went unnoticed by Yahoo! inspite of high votes). I have worked it to correct the RSS version of the Blogger feed, to overcome the ATOM weirdness.

You just need to enter a simple URL, and get the final URL as RSS. Doing so will however give your feed a weird title (see for yourself! :P), so you'll be better off cloning the pipe. Also, as Ramani pointed out to me, the feeds are cached by feed readers, so don't worry if you don't immediately see any updates to your posts. Give it about half an hour or so, and you should see your new posts popping up :)

Ofcourse, once Pipes is fixed to properly parse ATOM, I'll change the pipe to not hack it's way out. But I'd wish Blogger would fix this natively, would reduce the big Pipes overhead being added to the feed call. Maybe we're all missing some GDATA query strings? :P

Let me know if you find any bugs!

Update (24/02): Ok, A Pipes employee responded to my feedback (Suggestion), and said that the error I was getting (below) has been fixed. He also said that it'd go live in a day or two, but I'm yet to see anything change. Let me know if you do...(27/02) This has been fixed now! Enjoy :)

Update (19/02): I don't know what's wrong, but the content from the feed being generated by this pipe has disappeared. If you're using it (cloned), tell me if you're seeing this (you will only see the titles). So now an ATOM to RSS transfer doesn't transfer the date, and an RSS to RSS transfer doesn't transfer the content! :( I don't know what's going on with Pipes!


Singpolyma said...

First off -- brilliance in using the RSS feed (which is better anyway) to output RSS ;) !

Just in defense of Yahoo (I know, weird for me :P) :

1) They have responded to this issue and probably see the one we're all voting on as a partial duplicate (http://suggestions.yahoo.com/detail/?prop=Pipes&fid=6253)

2) There are two issues ahead of us on votes, which are big features: (http://suggestions.yahoo.com/?prop=Pipes&fid=0#rating)

3) The proposed solution is better than a quick hack to 'fix' this 'problem' but will take longer to code

Aditya said...

Those two issues are extremely legit (I voted for them too), so yes, this does seem minor. Especially as you mentioned, ATOM isn't even a standard, so Yahoo! can take it's time at the moment.

A hack is supposed to be a 'workaround', isn't it? There's always a native way of doing it, but since the code is closed to us .... :P

I hope they get it fixed fast, and open Pipes for codes! :)