It's more about the visitors to my websites. It used to be enough to embed a feed and people would subscribe. These days there's so little in-browser glue that you either have to know what to do with it, or... or what?
The point here is to try to work out how people stay up to date with individual websites.
https://feed43.com/ : a bit technical but the free version is sufficient for most sites
All other solutions are quite limited in their free version (5 news per day and feed deleted if nothing happens during 1 week)... and quite expensive in their paid version.
FetchRSS
Feedity
Feed Creator
This last one have a inexpensive "to host" version.
I have come across feed43 but have not tried to test it with some of the links im looking to create rss feeds for. At a quick glance, it didn't seem user friendly but if you vouch for it ill have to check it out.
An RSS link on homepage AND a RSS Autodiscovery link in the source code is for me the best solution. RSS Autodiscovery make it discoverable by any RSS reader
Looking at the blogroll he's talking aboit, I counted :
9 blogs with RSS Autodiscovery + link pointing to the RSS feed
20 blogs with RSS Autodiscovery only
3 blogs with link to the RSS feed
4 blogs with nothing (including it's own blog)
RSS link+autodiscovery would be so cool on every blog!
There's plenty of really good solutions around :
1. Online: Inoreader, Feedly, Newsblur Newsbin, The Old Reader, Feeder...
2. Browser extension: the great Feedbro
3. Desktop: Liferea (Linux), QuiteRSS (Windows), Caffeinated, Readki, Reeder (MacOS)
For RSSOwl and RSS Bandit (Windows), there's nothing new for years/
The great FeedDemon (Windows) stopped it's dev years ago.
3. Self-hosted: Tiny Tiny RSS, Fever, Leed, Selfoss
Totally agree! Subtome was a great project but it lack updates. I talked weeks ago with @julien51, it's creator, and he told me that it didn't have time maintaining it but he would integer contributions.
Is it perhaps possible that in this particular case, the difference you so wisely point to between a format and a protocol is possessed of a great and bountiful opportunity to be relevant? The discussion at hand is between "protocols" and "platforms", which might otherwise be cast as "standards" and "products".
Again, you're completely correct. It might just be worth considering that in some cases, a distinction without difference can be of limited value to a discussion where it is at best tangential.