On Sat, 13 Nov 2004 11:25:44 +0100, Danny Ayers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I see your point, but tend to disagree. "modified" - yes, there would be a strong case for that being in protocol, if it's aimed right down at machine-bits level.
Yup.
But "updated" is up with the content as top-level publisher/reader- oriented information.
That's why I don't think 'updated' should be a part of the protocol either. It belongs in the format. Most of the format is authorative information, but we mix in some non-authorative more objective machine-readable stuff that I feel belongs in and for the protocol.
Similarly "deleted" (or whatever) in the form it has been proposed isn't really saying some piece of data has necessarily changed, rather that the publisher wishes to provide some addtional information about that data (it's no longer wanted).
The action of deletion is done by the author. So is the action of modification. Still I feel that this is an action provided through an interface that should be provided automatically to subscribers, maybe through a <deleted> element.
It's very much up to the client, likely in the UI on how to respond to that piece of information, as in the case of "updated".
'updated' is probably something you'd like to show the user. 'deleted' might also be shown, but that goes for 'modified' as well. What you choose to show and hide from the user is implementation-specific, but how the information is provided should not be.
Authorative dates should be picked explicitly by the user (such as 'updated'), while 'modified' and 'deleted' are dates that are provided through an action by the user; he has either modified or deleted the entry.
We could push "deleted" down to the protocol level, and have it correspond to HTTP DELETE at the other end of the pipe. I could be wrong, but I don't think that's what is required.
Support for the HTTP DELETE method is of course not required to be able to provide an exact 'deleted' date, but an action corresponding to HTTP's DELETE, need to be supported. There has to be a 'delete' link or similar in the interface that the user can press. Still, very implementation-specific, but deleting an entry is not up for much interpretation. Either you delete it or you don't.
Whether the action of 'delete' puts your entry in a recycle bin, in an �unpublished� state or whatever, doesn't matter. What matters is the action and what you want to tell your subscribers.
I think what's needed is more "remove from view" than "remove every trace".
Yes. I don't disagree with that.
-- Asbj�rn Ulsberg -=|=- [EMAIL PROTECTED] �He's a loathsome offensive brute, yet I can't look away�
