The Link Post. ⇒
17 August 2009, early morning
I have to disagree with the bulk of what Shawn's saying here. I find it annoying when a link post doesn't link to the link in question using the title. What about you? Do people prefer the way he does things?
This is a post from my link log: If you click the title of this post you will be taken the web page I am discussing.
No, I’m with you. I just want to hit a keystroke in the feed reader and get the link, not sniff around with my mouse.
by D on August 17 2009, 12:32 pm #
If I click on the link title, I expect to go to your article with the pithy one-liners.
And I hate thinking I’m opening up the link post from RSS and being sent to the link instead. This means I have to manually go back to your blog to read any comments left there.
by Dave on August 17 2009, 8:06 pm #
So you prefer his system. God damn it. Maybe I should make the ATOM feed behave one way, and the RSS feed behave another. Hah!
by ramanan on August 17 2009, 8:30 pm #
It’s a bit of a pain hunting down comments. But now that you have a comments feed (it is new, right?) I’ll just read that.
Generally it’s a pain to open a bunch of pages from NetNewsWire and then have to click on the link in each of them.
On the other hand, it does (as the article mentions) give you some context. I guess I’m undecided.
Also, Atom isn’t an acronym.
by grant on August 19 2009, 2:35 pm #
I thought it stood for ATOM TO OHIO MAN.
And as of right now I have a comment feed. You could subscribe to the “comments” feed before, but that would get you articles I post to the comments section of my site. (i.e. nothing.) The new feed is actually a real comments feed. Let me know if the comment feed doesn’t work. (Autodiscovery should find the Atom and RSS feeds.)
I operate under the assumption people come to the site once in a while, even if they read the site from their feed reader.
by ramanan on August 19 2009, 3:39 pm #