Feed Validator
Loading…
Loading…
Validators and utilities that complement RSS / Atom Feed Validator — same session, no sign-up.
Ctrl+Enter (or ⌘+Enter) to validate.
Paste RSS 2.0 or Atom XML. Checks well-formed XML and core feed structure (similar scope to W3C Feed Validator basics).
Use this RSS / Atom Feed Validator to check whether a feed is well-formed XML and whether it includes the core RSS 2.0 or Atom structure expected by feed readers, aggregators, and content syndication tools. It helps publishers, developers, and SEO teams catch common feed issues before they break subscriptions, cause parsing errors, or prevent updates from being discovered. This validator is useful for blogs, news sites, podcasts, CMS exports, and API-generated feeds where reliable syndication matters. It focuses on structural validation and basic feed integrity, making it a practical first check for troubleshooting feed delivery and compatibility.
This tool checks the feed as XML first, then evaluates whether the document matches the expected RSS 2.0 or Atom feed structure. That typically includes required root elements, namespaces, channel or feed containers, and key metadata fields such as title, link, and description or subtitle. If the XML is malformed, the feed may fail immediately. If the XML is valid but the feed structure is incomplete, some readers may still reject it or display it incorrectly.
RSS and Atom feeds are still widely used for syndication, automation, and content discovery. A feed that is not well-formed or does not follow the expected structure can fail in readers, stop updates from appearing, or create inconsistent behavior across platforms. Validation helps teams catch issues early, reduce debugging time, and maintain a reliable publishing pipeline. For sites that depend on subscriptions or automated content distribution, feed integrity is part of basic technical quality.
| Feed Type | Root Element | Common Child Items |
|---|---|---|
| RSS 2.0 | channel | item |
| Atom | feed | entry |
An RSS feed validator checks whether an RSS document is valid XML and whether it follows the expected RSS 2.0 structure. It helps confirm that the feed has the right root elements, metadata, and item formatting so feed readers and aggregators can parse it reliably.
An Atom feed validator checks the XML structure and required elements of an Atom feed. Atom uses a different schema and namespace model than RSS, so validation helps ensure the feed is formatted correctly for readers and tools that expect Atom syntax.
Yes. A feed must first be well-formed XML before it can be interpreted as RSS or Atom. After that, the validator checks whether the document contains the core feed structure and required elements expected by the format.
XML well-formedness is only the first requirement. A feed can be valid XML but still miss required RSS or Atom fields, use the wrong namespace, or include dates and links in a format that some readers do not accept. Structural validation helps narrow down those issues.
Common problems include unclosed tags, invalid characters, missing channel or feed metadata, incorrect namespaces, and malformed dates. In practice, many feed issues come from template changes, CMS output bugs, or manual edits that break XML syntax.
Yes, it can help with the XML and core feed structure used by podcast RSS feeds. However, podcast platforms may also require additional tags and media-specific metadata, so a feed may need more than basic validation to meet platform-specific requirements.
RSS is still used for syndication, automation, and content distribution, even though it is not a direct ranking factor. A clean feed can support discovery workflows, content republishing systems, and technical consistency across publishing platforms.
Custom namespaces should be declared correctly and used consistently. Namespace errors can break parsing or cause elements to be ignored by readers. If your feed includes extensions for media, content, or podcasts, validation should confirm that the XML remains well-formed and namespace-safe.
Yes. A feed may be structurally valid but still render poorly if it contains unsupported markup, missing metadata, or content that a specific reader does not handle well. Validation confirms syntax and structure, but display behavior can still vary by platform.