To go further: there&#x27;s basically no point in the &quot;description&quot; part of an RSS item. RSS is broken in that authors need to lure people onto their sites, so they make the RSS item itself enclose just enough of a preview to make you &quot;click through&quot;—whereupon their site can show you ads and they can make money.<p>How RSS <i>should</i> work, in an ideal technical sense, is to eschew enclosing any content-body in feed items themselves, and instead just encourage RSS consumers (feed-reader clients; feed-muxer daemons) to scrape the permalinks of the feed items, and then heuristically extract the body-content from the scrape-result, and cache both the resulting page-archive and the resulting cleaned-up text, making <i>both</i> representations available offline.<p>This, obviously, kills blog ad revenue. But it&#x27;s better to kill it and replace it with something better (402 micropayment-required errors at point-of-caching, handled automatically by the RSS content-spidering daemon as an HTTP client, with costs passed on to its subscribers?) than to continue on with this semi-braindamaged &quot;I have an offline cache but that doesn&#x27;t actually mean I can read anything offline&quot; world.