Saturday, 4 August 2007

Flock 0.9x test

I follow the development of Flock from time-to-time. Updating as major releases become available. Playing with the interface, toying around with posting here, etc.

Some notes on preparing and writing this post:

  1. Adding a link means spec'ing the full URL (or is it URI?), e.g, "" or "" don't work.
  2. Adding a blog, at least a MetaWeblog API capable blog service, means each category shows up as a separate blog. Seems I read that somewhere, might be a limitation of MetaWeblog API, or just a misunderstanding by Flock. Not sure, but it's odd interface to work with when mentally I don't organize my blog this way.
  3. The HTML could be better... no <p> tags, at least in the source view. Editor note: After posting it seems that not only are there no <p> elements, there are no break tags either. The first view of this post was one CLOB (Character Large Object for you minor geeks).

The real test is what this looks like once I hit post... Tada.

Posted by caffeinated at 9:56 AM in experimental madness


[Trackback URL for this entry]

Comment: erwan at Tue, 21 Aug 3:32 PM


1. Yes, you do need to put the full URL, because you may want to create a relative link

2. We're using blogger.getUsersBlogs (that is a part of Movable Type API because it extends the Blogger API). For some reason, Blojsom returns a list of blogs (one for each API). As far as I know this is the only platform that behaves that way, Movable Type and Wordpress for example only return one blog if you have one blog.

3. We're using metaWeblog.newPost and passing the parameter ' mt_convert_breaks: "1" '. For the Movable Type API, that means that the server is responsible to convert the line breaks to whatever it wants. Wordpress, for example, creates <p> tags. Sending a blog with <p> tags would mess up for platforms that store line breaks in their database and do the conversion to <p> tags at rendering. That would basically make edition of the post very painful.

Comment: Great Google-Fu at Wed, 22 Aug 10:09 PM

In your context, is both a URL and a URI, as the complete set of URLs is a subset of the complete set of URIs. Specifying a connection scheme (i.e. "http:") places it firmly in the category of URL, though using the term URL has been deprecated for some time in technical publications. See for more.

Your comment:

(not displayed)

Live Comment Preview:

« August »