Now, I know that podcasts are written in xml. But really, does that actually matter. How hard would it have been in the specification to have the file extension for the xml file to be oh I don't know. . . .pod, or .pdc, or .pd, or anything other than .xml?
Why does this matter do you ask? It matters because I'm working for a radio station and no one knows what to do with the podcast link. They say "what is all this gobledy gook code when I click on the podcast hyperlink? If there were a unique extension even if it was still holding a standard text file with all standard XML code in it, you could bloody well associate it with Itunes, or songbird, or amarok, or any number of other audio players that support podcasts. This seems like a major oversight, and I haven't seen anyone deal with it yet. Tell me this is up for some sort of rewrite in the next version of the podcast spec. Oh wait, probably not.