Re: DontSyndicate Pace

[Joe Gregorio <joe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Tim Bray wrote:
> Pardon for not announcing sooner; my ISP decided that imc.org was on 
> some spamcop list, so I got un-subbed, so I re-subbed under my Sun address.
> ====================================================================
>
> I've been unhappy for some time about the multipart/alternative 
> construct in the current syntax & protocol.  Among other things, I'd 
> like to use Atom to post a picture to my blog, but then I want to 
> reference the picture from an ordinary HTML post rather than have it 
> show up itself in the syndication feed.  So I proposed adding 
> syndicate="true|false" to <atom:entry>, so that you can do 
> non-syndicated posts (I assume this would be used mostly in POSTS to the 
> feed rather than GETS of it).
>
> I'm trying to make something that is (a) simpler, (b) more web-friendly, 
> and (c) fits better with the way posts are naturally constructed.

This broaches the issue of the 'state' of an entry. While 'syndicate' is 
one such state surely there are others. How about 'draft', which would 
imply that the content should not be published. And what if you have 
email subscribers that get notified when a new entry is published, could 
that also be rolled into the 'state' of an entry?

Now there are two basic ways to go with how to implement this. One is to 
create a series of 'true' | 'false' valued attributes to an entry, such 
as draft="true" or email="false". An alternative is to add a single 
'state' element to entry that contains different values, for example 
<state>draft</state>. I have no strong preference for either solution, 
but I would like to see something added to track entry state.

	-joe

--
http://BitWorking.org
http://WellFormedWeb.org