Would You Prefer Full-text Feed or Partial-text Feed?

Filed in: Site News, Technology, Web, Weblog — February 23rd, 2006

I stumbled upon an interesting post of Robert Scoble, entitled “Blog Herald doesn’t understand why full-text feeds work“. The entry argues that full-text feed does work. It is the way RSS should be. On the other hand, Blog Herald did not agree on full-text feed.

Full-text feed: you get full content straight from your RSS aggregator. No need to visit the author’s website.

Partial-text feed: You read excerpt of content on your RSS aggregator, and visit the entry’s permalink if it interested you.

I can’t say which one is better. In my RSS aggregator, I have both full and partial text feeds. However, I would like to know about your opinion.

Currently, LiewCF.com has over 600 feed subscribers, and 60 feed email readers. (Thank you for supporting!)

Would you prefer full-text feed or partial-text feed?

Please take a second to vote using the poll in the sidebar (top). The poll will end on 1st March 2006. Comments are welcomed, too.

Note: Currently, LiewCF.com is using partial-text feed.

Update: SitePoint blogs decided to use full-text feeds, too.

At the end of the day, we have chosen to strike a compromise, with our blog feeds offering full content while our other feeds (articles, forums, etc.) offer more limited content.

[Read SitePoint blogs]

feed, rss

Hello there! If you are new here, you might want to subscribe to the RSS feed for updates on this topic.

Read also:

Jibone

Most RSS readers have an option to only serve Partial-text feed on a Full-text feed content.

As for me as a publisher and reader I prefer Full-text feed. As a reader I do not want to leave my feed reader to read the rest of the content. As a publisher, I do not want to force my readers to view my site to get my content, they could read my content as how they like it.

GeminiGeek

I agree with what Lim Chee Aun said. We should allow reader to choose either partial or full. Too bad wordpress doesn't have the option to provide BOTH full and partial feed.

I personally like full feed, I'm too lazy to open up my browser. I only open up my browser when I feel like commenting. As for partial feed that I have subscribed, for some reason I don't even bother to click on the full text link, eventhough the excerpts looks interesting.

Im weird eeh :D

WTJ

partial

amin

I use google reader and agreed to azmeen...

Malaysia Property

I think it is just fair for the author to get refered to. Therefore, I would prefer partial-text.

Also partial-text will allow user to see more information, then click on those that are interested. Plus, the author would at least get credit on their work.

Lim Chee Aun

Technically speaking (and maybe conceptually), this question should be solved from client-side, meaning that the user should be able to choose whether it's full or partial, not you as the webmaster to decide for them. :-D

Azmeen

Partial. Both as reader and publisher.

As reader: I just want the excerpts first. If the opening sentences are interesting enough. I will visit the publisher's web site and read the full post. This also shows me how good the author is at composition.

As a publisher: Want to know more, the visit my web site. I put in so much effort to compose it, and design my web site... so you better visit it if you're interested in what I wrote.