We are seeing issues with some RSS aggregators refusing to load koha rss links, there are errors when checked in the W3C validator: https://validator.w3.org/feed/check.cgi
This may be fixed by Bug 16111.
I just checked again in a 22.11 installation and we are still not providing valid RSS data from the search results. This feed does not validate. line 45, column 4: Undefined description element: p (100 occurrences) [help] <p> ^ In addition, interoperability with the widest range of feed readers could be improved by implementing the following recommendations. line 22, column 163: Self reference doesn't match document location [help] ... p;sort_by=acqdate_dsc&format=atom"/> ^ line 32, column 1: Misplaced Item (49 occurrences) [help] <item>
Created attachment 164891 [details] [review] Bug 16567: Correct RSS feed validity errors This patch corrects a few markup errors in the XML feeds to make the feeds validate correctly. The template has been largely re-indented to improve readability and eliminate tab characters. To test, apply the patch and perform a search in the OPAC. - Open the RSS link appearing after the "Your search returned..." header. - Depending on how your browser handles XML documents you may need to view source on the page to see the actual XML markup. - Copy the source and paste it into the W3C feed validator: https://validator.w3.org/feed/#validate_by_input - The feed should be found to be valid. - In my tests you'll get a "Recommendation" about "Self reference doesn't match document location." I think this recommendation doesn't apply. Perform the same test with the other two available formats: Atom and OpenSearch: - Change the end of the RSS feed url from '&format=rss' to '&format=atom' and validate the result. - The same "self reference" recommendation will come up, and again I think we can ignore it. - There is another recommendation about "Two entries with the same value for atom:updated." The updated time is set to the same time as the feed itself (the time when the feed was generated. Maybe this is incorrect. If so we need a follow-up that exposes a different value to the template. biblio.datecreated maybe? - Change the end of the feed url from '&format=atom' to '&format=OpenSearchDescription' and validate that result.
When I tested this patch rss and atom feeds validated with the same recommendations that you mentioned. When I tried to change the feed url to &format=OpenSearchDescription it just loaded the OPAC search results page instead of loading an xml document. Maybe I am missing a step to enable that format, or have the parameter wrong somehow?
(In reply to Brendan Lawlor from comment #4) > When I tried to change the feed url to &format=OpenSearchDescription it just > loaded the OPAC search results page Sorry I copied and pasted the parameter incorrectly. It's case-sensitive, and should be 'opensearchdescription'
Test notes: When I change the feed url to &format=opensearchdescription the browser behaves slightly different than the other types of feeds. It immediately downloads a file called opac-search.osdx and redirects back to whatever you were previously on. I was able to open the opac-search.osdx file with notepad and see that it was xml and validate it with the W3C tool.
Created attachment 165198 [details] [review] Bug 16567: Correct RSS feed validity errors This patch corrects a few markup errors in the XML feeds to make the feeds validate correctly. The template has been largely re-indented to improve readability and eliminate tab characters. To test, apply the patch and perform a search in the OPAC. - Open the RSS link appearing after the "Your search returned..." header. - Depending on how your browser handles XML documents you may need to view source on the page to see the actual XML markup. - Copy the source and paste it into the W3C feed validator: https://validator.w3.org/feed/#validate_by_input - The feed should be found to be valid. - In my tests you'll get a "Recommendation" about "Self reference doesn't match document location." I think this recommendation doesn't apply. Perform the same test with the other two available formats: Atom and OpenSearch: - Change the end of the RSS feed url from '&format=rss' to '&format=atom' and validate the result. - The same "self reference" recommendation will come up, and again I think we can ignore it. - There is another recommendation about "Two entries with the same value for atom:updated." The updated time is set to the same time as the feed itself (the time when the feed was generated. Maybe this is incorrect. If so we need a follow-up that exposes a different value to the template. biblio.datecreated maybe? - Change the end of the feed url from '&format=atom' to '&format=OpenSearchDescription' and validate that result. Signed-off-by: Brendan Lawlor <blawlor@clamsnet.org>
You should be able to check the <link rel="self"> on a sandbox by validating the feed link rather than copy-pasting the feed - when the W3C forked feedvalidator.org and added validate_by_input, they really should have replaced the recommendation with a "Warning: unable to check self reference while validating by input" since they have no idea what the feed URL is.
Created attachment 165523 [details] [review] Bug 16567: Correct RSS feed validity errors This patch corrects a few markup errors in the XML feeds to make the feeds validate correctly. The template has been largely re-indented to improve readability and eliminate tab characters. To test, apply the patch and perform a search in the OPAC. - Open the RSS link appearing after the "Your search returned..." header. - Depending on how your browser handles XML documents you may need to view source on the page to see the actual XML markup. - Copy the source and paste it into the W3C feed validator: https://validator.w3.org/feed/#validate_by_input - The feed should be found to be valid. - In my tests you'll get a "Recommendation" about "Self reference doesn't match document location." I think this recommendation doesn't apply. Perform the same test with the other two available formats: Atom and OpenSearch: - Change the end of the RSS feed url from '&format=rss' to '&format=atom' and validate the result. - The same "self reference" recommendation will come up, and again I think we can ignore it. - There is another recommendation about "Two entries with the same value for atom:updated." The updated time is set to the same time as the feed itself (the time when the feed was generated. Maybe this is incorrect. If so we need a follow-up that exposes a different value to the template. biblio.datecreated maybe? - Change the end of the feed url from '&format=atom' to '&format=OpenSearchDescription' and validate that result. Signed-off-by: Brendan Lawlor <blawlor@clamsnet.org> Signed-off-by: Martin Renvoize <martin.renvoize@ptfs-europe.com>
Pretty happy to see this addressed :)
Pushed for 24.05! Well done everyone, thank you!
Pushed to 23.11.x for 23.11.06
Backported to 23.05.x for upcoming 23.05.12