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

RE: Tombstones




On Sun, 6 Jan 2008, David Powell wrote:


No there isn't, and practically anything is syntactically valid according to
the spec.  But, I'm not replying to these posts to save people from reading
the spec, but to highlight the harmful effects of these extensions.  I
believe that violating the separation between entry and feed metadata breaks
a large and useful category of applications and that approving such
behaviour would be extremely damaging to the Atom community.


Agreed 100%.



The feed abstraction for Atom and RSS is one of a feed+metadata and a stream
of entries+metadata - this has been the case for the last 10 years, and it
isn't going to change now.  The model is not, as would be required if were
Yes -- it's that easy to grok abstraction that makes Atom (and RSS) "work". 

--peter keane


to mix entry and feed metadata, a feed+metadata and a stream of
entries+metadata + associations with every feed document that that entry has
ever been part of just in case there is some sort of misplaced entry
metadata hidden at feed level, so that clients looking at an entry can
manually reimplement the sliding window mechanism for tombstones or
whatever.  Urgh.

--
Dave