I just received an inquiry from a user wanting to know why when he synchronizes Firefox bookmarks to Safari, his/her "livemarks" become static folders containing whatever feeds were current at the time of the sync.
I've never been able to find an authoritative source on "Live Bookmarks", "Livemarks" or whatever. The Wikipedia article on "Livemarks" is acknowledged to be only a "stub", and implies that Safari supports them, but I don't think so. I would say that Safari supports "RSS Feeds" but does not support "Livemarks". But since there is no legal definition of "Livemark", either one of us could be correct.
Here's the way I see it: Although you can bookmark an RSS feed in Safari, and Safari knows how to render RSS feeds, it does not do what Firefox does, which is to make the RSS feed into a folder, update it when you display it in your bookmarks, and populate its children with the current articles. I believe this is what Firefox calls a "livemark".
Well, what Bookdog currently does is to translate the livemark into a regular, static folder and the articles into bookmarks. Actually, the latter is not a translation because, in Firefox, they really are bookmarks. The former is the best that can be done given that Safari does not support the dynamic, "livemark folders".
But I'll give some thought to how this may be improved in the future. I suppose that Bookdog could do what Firefox does, updating the folder when -- duh -- when?
But what good is this feature in Firefox anyhow? I mean, when you want to read a feed in Safari, you click on it, and it goes and gets the article summaries. If you set the article length to 0, you get kind of the same thing as in Firefox...
Does it really make life that much better to be able to see the article titles in your bookmarks like Firefox does?
Any Livemarks Gurus out there, let me know!