Re: Unofficial last call on draft-snell-atompub-feed-expires-04.txt

["James Holderness" <j4_james@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I know the Atom working group seemed to be against reusing dublin core in 
the core Atom spec, but since this is an extension, were dcterms:valid 
and/or dcterms:available ever considered as alternatives? From my 
understanding they appear to be describing essentially the same thing.

I don't particularly like the whole DCMI Period structure they're using, but 
since it's an existing format, any aggregator author that wishes to support 
this sort of thing is probably going to be supporting it anyway. Adding 
another extension that does essentially the same thing just gives them more 
work to do.

Or have I complete misunderstood the intended use?

James M Snell wrote:
> Summary: introduces a mechanism for specifying a date-time or maximum age 
> for the informational content of a feed or entry