I noticed today that feedburner was not correctly referencing my site when I used relative urls for internal links. I’ve gone through my last ten posts and updated the relative links to absolute urls and have re-synced my feedburner feed. My RSS feed subscribers and regular visitors should not notice any disruption or other negative effect but if you do experience a bug please let me know. I’ve updated this internal link process in preparation for a syndication opportunity I’ll be taking part of at a great community. More to come on that community once everything is finalized.
Have a great weekend everyone!
I’ve just been using…
http://www.adampieniazek.com/feed/
… for the RSS feed. What advantages does feedburner have?
Great question. As far as I can tell there’d be virtually no difference on your end.
The feedburner advantage is on my side in terms of allowing people to subscribe to my feed via e-mail via feedburner, taking traffic off my servers and for tracking readership.
I’m subscribed to both versions of the feed, the feed direct from this site and the feedburner one, and the direct feed always properly connected to relative links and will continue to properly link to the absolute urls. My newsreader, NetNewsWire, actually seemed to interpret both correctly but internal links at feedburner.com would result in errors.
FYI, if anyone is wondering what the difference is, in the html code a relative url would like this:
/tag/bike/
and an absolute url:
http://www.adampieniazek.com/tag/bike/
The problem with the relative urls and feedburner (or any other site that syndicated my feed, facebook for instance) is that feedburner (or any other site) would interpret the relative url as coming from feedburner, hence you’d get an error page that
http://www.feedburner.com/tag/bike/
doesnt exist.
So now that I’m using the full address for internal links every source that pulls my RSS feed will link back here correctly.