On 15 Nov 2004, at 21:43, Antone Roundy wrote:
On Monday, November 15, 2004, at 01:25 PM, Henry Story wrote:PaceEntriesAllTheWayDown2 is an actual Pace with supporting arguments from Anotone Roundy [1], which on the face of it have a lot of weight.For the record, I'm not yet convinced. While, as my message outlined, I think there are reasonable ways to reconcile many of the differences between head and entry, I did also mention a few differences that I'd like to see addressed specifically. If justification can't be given for the issues with introspection, generator, content, origin, id and tagline/summary, then I'm not ready to bite yet--certainly not on calling head an entry, and perhaps not on merging head and entry within the spec.
[1] http://www.imc.org/atom-syntax/mail-archive/msg11577.html
Yes, I had understood very well, Antone. You perfectly outlined the problem. I had myself not yet done this detail work with the latest spec, as there are some aspects of the spec that I don't completely understand, and as it has changed a lot. Now with PaceDeclareVictoryOnFormat on the table, cleaning up exercises such as this make a lot of sense.
For the record I am not convinced myself in being correct on this issue. I am convinced it is really worth investigating though.
Here I will attempt to answer these questions. These are attempts only. If other people have better arguments I am very open to them.
On 15 Nov 2004, at 16:55, Antone Roundy wrote:
Other differences:
* introspection - I'm not up on what the introspection file is all about enough to comment on this one
I don't understand introspection that well either. But I suspect there would be no harm with Entries having introspection files too.
* generator - I don't see this making sense in entry
Well, why not? This could make a lot of sense for aggregator feeds, it seems to me.
* content - I don't see this making sense in head
Why not: Add a bit of nice content to the head, for richer news readers may be quite nice. It works out quite nicely for James Gosling's blog [1]
* origin - I don't see this making sense in head
Good one. I don't know about this.
Perhaps this would make sense in the case of a feed inside a feed: namely responses to someone's entry. If you think of the responses as constituting a feed with the original post as the "head" then this feed would in fact have an origin feed.
* id: required in entry, not in head - as it should be
Mhhh. I had not realized that the id was mandatory in atom entries.
Of course if you think about using the Atom API for setting your feed head entry, then it would not be silly for your entry to have an id.
It may also be what is needed to allow you to change your feed head over time, (say you make a spelling mistake in your feed head), and yet be able to talk about it being the same feed.
* if tagline becomes summary, the fact that it's sometimes required in entry, but never in head - as it should be
Yes. But why do you really want to make it required for a feed?
Henry Story
[1] http://today.java.net/jag/
