Yeah, I understand why it can be useful, I just don't know why it's *required*. Ah well, that proverbial ship has sailed ;-)
Franklin Tse wrote: > When the URL of a feed is changed, its atom:id can remain unchanged, and that > is assumed to be the same feed theoretically. > > (I am not sure if that is the case in the real world) > > Franklin > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "James M Snell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Franklin Tse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "James Holderness" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "atom-syntax" > <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, 23 May, 2007 16:43 > Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-nottingham-atompub-feed-history-10.txt > >> Well, for an RSS feed, it's URL pretty much plays the role of the >> identifier*. An atom:id certainly could be used, but I wouldn't imagine >> that any sane implementation would make it anything different than the >> URL of the RSS feed itself. >> >> * quite honestly, I've never really understood why atom:feed requires an >> atom:id :-) >> >> - James >> >> Franklin Tse wrote: >>> [snip] >>> By the way, do publishers need to use an atom:id element in RSS 2 feeds >>> since there is no equivalent in RSS 2? >>> [snip] >
