On 5/14/06, Tim Bray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm thinking about the design for a comment system for my blog, and I'd like to implement it as an APP server. Only thing is, people who are commenting don't get to see or review the existing "entries" in the incoming-comments feed. So they can POST but there's nothing they can GET. Does this break any rules? -Tim
In my opinion, it does not. In many cases, the listing of collections and members within them is likely to be contextual (for example, filtered by the user authentication context). If people feel the spec isn't clear on this point, it seems as easy as changing the language in section 5.4 from "An Atom Feed Document is returned containing one Atom Entry for each member resource" to "An Atom Feed Document is returned containing one Atom Entry for each member resource that is visible [available?] to the client". I think servers should be free to list read-only resources (w/ no "edit" link relation) or omit them as is situationally appropriate. APP is a publishing protocol, not a feed protocol; some servers may overload GET to perform both collection listing and feed functions, but it can't be assumed by an APP client. -- Kyle
