Bill de hOra wrote: > James M Snell wrote: > >> That said, what is the value of reusing atom:entry in this case? >> [snip] > > Two things: > > 1: what you deleted was an entry. >
Ok, but why does that mean we have to use atom:entry to represent the thing that no longer exists? > 2: you might want to know the properties of the entry that was deleted, > not just its name. > There's no reason this data could not be added as children of the x:deleted element. Keep in mind that atom:entry has minimum content requirements so you'd either have to keep around a minimum amount of metadata or start passing around useless cruft. - James > cheers > Bill > > >
