[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Feed History -04


On Oct 17, 2005, at 11:06 AM, Byrne Reese wrote: 
5. Is the issue of whether a feed is incremental or not (the
fh:incremental
element) relevant to this proposal?


non-incremental feeds wouldn't be paged, by definition, would they?


Why not? Why wouldn't I have a "Top 100 DVDs of All Time" broken out
into 10 feeds of 10 entries each?

Although one could say that the presence of 'next' and 'prev' links
indicate that the feed is incremental, and the absence of those links
indicates the feed is complete.

Ugh! This suggests yet another feed model. First, what we've already got:

1) Incremental feed document: a feed document that contains a subset of the entries that are currently in the feed (resource), where new entries are added to the feed without replacing old entries.

2) Non-incrememental feed document: a feed document which contains representations of every entry which is currently part of the feed, where new entries replace old entries.

and then...

3) ??? feed document: a feed document which contains representations of a subset of the entries that are currently in the feed (resource), where new entries replace old entries.

Linking up #3 documents to show a history of the feed will be even more complicated than what we've been discussing. Do we need such a beast? I wish I could unequivocally say "no", but I'm forced to equivocate: are not search result feeds #3? It seems that indeed we need two separate mechanisms--a paging mechanism and a history mechanism. Unless both are going to go into the same extension, the extensions should be explicit about the the fact that they describe one and not the other. And we should choose link/@rel names carefully so that one doesn't end up using names better suited fore the other.