This came up before, but I wanted to check in with the group again just
to make sure our (IBM's) intended solution was acceptable to the WG and
wouldn't cause any interop issues.
In our implementation, we use APP collections to manage other APP
collections. Each entry in the feed is representative of exactly one
APP collection. To indicate such, we provide a special category that
identifies the "type" of entry and include an app:collection element as
an extension of the atom:entry.
The entry ends up looking like:
<entry>
<id>...</id>
<title>My Activity</title>
...
<category rel="http://ibm.com/.../type";
term="collection" />
<app:collection title="My Activity"
href="/oa/service/atom/activity?uuid=...">
...
</app:collection>
</entry>
Including the app:collection element directly in the entry serves the
purpose of not only allowing us to identify the URI where entries are to
be posted, but also provides us with a container for listing things like
accept, what features are supported (via an extension), etc.
Thoughts? Complaints? Reasons why it wouldn't work?
- James
