Bill de h�ra wrote:
Not quite. I still don't see that either is a special case of the other. I think the data structure for this is a 2-tuple feed(head, list), not a 1-tuple feed(list) of uniform type. In my mind, the second member of that tuple is a delayed list (i.e., a stream [1]), not a set. But of course you could represent all the entries as a set, but that's a math thing rather than a programming thing.
I recall Bob Wyman's analogy to a sliding window or some such capturing my sense of a feed's entries perfectly.
I went for that analogy at first, as well. Now I think it's just a server-determined subset of a collection. You can characterize the results of a sequence of requests as a stream if you want, but that is true of any web resource.
In any case, this proposal was just a way to provide addressable metadata for feeds. People seem to be having an allergic reaction to it, which is funny to me, since the use cases for entries themselves are very divergent.
There are other ways to do it, so it's not a big deal.
Robert Sayre
