RE: Question about section 9.3 of APP

[Joe Cheng <Joe.Cheng@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> This would be done using a hypothetical app:control extension and it
> would be the servers responsibility for ensuring that duplicates are not
> sent.

Unfortunately sometimes you do want duplicates sent--for example when you update the post. (Hopefully either the title or first few sentences of the body would have changed so it's obvious to the reader of the trackbacked post that it's not just a dupe.)

Maybe each entry would need a sub-collection for outgoing trackbacks? Bleh... :-\

> For instance, the server could allow that an entry POST or PUT to the
> server contains a t:sendTrackback element in the app:control.  The
> server could then remove that element from the created entry so that
> when the client GET's it, there are no sendTrackback elements that the
> client needs to worry about.  There might be sentTrackback elements but
> that's something else entirely.

Yep, that is definitely much better than overloading one element to represent both trackbacks to be sent and trackbacks to send.