On 10/11/04 11:45 AM, "Bob Wyman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> <origin>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-555</origin>
any screaming objections to this...
<origin href="...">tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-555</origin>
or even possibly this:
<origin href="..." type="application/rdf+xml" title="My RDF Feed"/>
Hmm ... someone remind me why atom:origin wants to communicate the feed:id
and not the feed:href? Remembering though that every entry will have an
atom:id to clearly identify the entry. Is it so we can establish precedence
and history of that entry being passed from aggregator to aggregator?
If an entry is originally published in Feed-A, picked up by an aggregator
and republished in Feed-B, which is then picked up by another aggregator and
republished in Feed-C ... what should the value of atom:origin in Feed-C be?
Should it be the atom:id of Feed-B, or Feed-A?
I'm starting to see <origin> as just a special case of <link>, the same way
the various service point links are. If so, then maybe it shouldn't be a
special case of <link> at all, since it will have a retrievable href which a
user might want to go explore (thus fitting the pattern of other <link>
elements according to whichever pace).
e.
