Comments on: Ill-advised RSS duplicate post solution in IE7 and Outlook 2007

By: » Microsoft Response To Outlook RSS Design InsideMicrosoft - part of the Blog News Channel

Wed, 12 Jul 2006 14:10:23 +0000

[…] By the by, here’s what T has to say: This is a good example of RSS aggregator developers attempting to fix a legitimate issue by doing readers an unintentional disservice. They are trying to keep duplicate posts from appearing in the aggregator which is a good thing, dupes most definitely suck, but their solution forgets about the many types of posts with updates. […]

By: [tweblog.com] - Toby Getsch » Blog Archive » Handling RSS duplicates in Outlook 2007 - some conversation

Tue, 11 Jul 2006 01:40:45 +0000

[…] michael affronti | microsoft outlook program managerDupes part deuxhttp://blogs.msdn.com/michael_affronti/archive/2006/07/10/661670.aspxThings that… make you go hmmIll-advised RSS duplicate post solution in IE7 and Outlook 2007http://www.makeyougohmm.com/20060710/3556/ […]

By: Toby Getsch

Toby Getsch — Tue, 11 Jul 2006 01:31:53 +0000

TDavid:

I think I agree with you, and posted a comment on Michael’s post saying that I think the default should be the “non-destructive” option, rather than having to find that option and toggle it on.

By: TDavid

TDavid — Tue, 11 Jul 2006 01:23:39 +0000

Toby - it’s still dependent on the user not deleting unless they turn it off. Will this be a buried option? Sounds like this will be the default option and that’s not good. Yeah, it’s good that the user can turn this off, but from a publisher standpoint this is an irritating function.

I appreciate Michael adding his clarifying post (and it was updated above earlier) but this isn’t a good way to deal with duplicate posts.

By: Toby Getsch

Toby Getsch — Tue, 11 Jul 2006 01:11:38 +0000

TDavid:

Michael’s post (http://blogs.msdn.com/michael_affronti/archive/2006/07/10/661670.aspx) clearly shows this option available, which makes answers your comment. “If you don’t like this delete model where removing a post from Outlook ignores all further updates on that individual item, there is an option to disable it. Toggling this option causes deletes to be non-destructive, and in the above scenario the user would see a new item downloaded for post B1 even though he deleted the original item in Outlook.”

Thanks for clearing it up Michael, and for quickly responding to this blog feedback!

By: TDavid

TDavid — Mon, 10 Jul 2006 23:54:20 +0000

Michael - this still isn’t good: “If it does, meaning the user has not deleted the item, then we will automatically update the content of the old post with the new content from the feed. If the user has deleted the item then we will not download a new item to replace.”

So if the user reads and then deletes the item, they still won’t get the future updates, so what you said in #3 has an if statement attached to it.

Why you guys have to try and reinvent the wheel is beyond me. If it’s updated and changed it is not a “duplicate” and just because somebody deleted it might mean they simply wanted to get it out of the way, not that they didn’t want to know when new content was available.

By: Michael Affronti

Michael Affronti — Mon, 10 Jul 2006 23:02:30 +0000

Also, to be clear, we would have seen your updated text.

By: Michael Affronti

Michael Affronti — Mon, 10 Jul 2006 23:01:39 +0000

I’ve tried to shore up any confusion with this post here: http://blogs.msdn.com/michael_affronti/archive/2006/07/10/661670.aspx. Please give it a read. Thanks for your feedback!

By: Toby Getsch

Toby Getsch — Mon, 10 Jul 2006 18:59:44 +0000

I could not agree more! Give us the option. I will not use an aggregator or reader that doesn’t let me see updates.

Or, of course, we could go back to real cut and paste and print stuff out and then fax a copy of the changes to all of the subscribers to an RSS feed.

I know there are things that I don’t know. However, IMHO, if MS doesn’t support getting updated feeds for specific posts w/ 2007 Office products, they are making a wrong decision.