+1. I was already thinking that some text was needed describing the
relationship between these.

- James

Mark Nottingham wrote:
> Hmm. It seems like you need to say something to this; otherwise people
> may get the feeling they can use them separately.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> 
> On 03/01/2008, at 3:52 PM, James M Snell wrote:
> 
>>
>> Mark Nottingham wrote:
>>> This looks good, except I'm having trouble with the trash feed; is a
>>> client who wishes to implement this spec required to look both for
>>> deleted-entry and link/@rel="trash", polling that if present? If so, it
>>> seems overly cumbersome to implement two mechanisms.
>>>
>>
>> The client can look for either.  Essentially, the deleted-entry element
>> tells you only that the entry was removed from this particular feed.  It
>> does not tell you if the entry exists in some other location.  The trash
>> feed is orthogonal to deleted-entry and provides a location where things
>> like soft-deleted items can be collected.  For instance, suppose we have
>> an Atompub collection managed by multiple authors, Bob and Joe.  Bob
>> deletes an entry. Joe discovers that that the entry has been deleted
>> when he sees the deleted-entry element.  If Joe wishes to recover the
>> deleted entry, he can go to the trash feed and look for it there.  A
>> client could poll the trash feed to discover deleted items if it wishes
>> to do so, but looking for the deleted-entry items would likely be more
>> efficient.
>>
>> - James
>>
>>> BTW, "trash" is culturally specific; how about "garbage"? <1/2 wink>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>>
>>> On 03/01/2008, at 1:15 PM, James M Snell wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Reviving the Tombstones draft. Consider this a work in progress.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-snell-atompub-tombstones-03.txt
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There are two significant changes:
>>>>
>>>> 1. deleted-entry is now part of the Atom namespace
>>>> 2. a "trash" link relation is registered to point
>>>>   to trash feeds.
>>>>
>>>> The trash feed approach and deleted-entry element approaches are
>>>> definitely compatible with one another.  They can be used together or
>>>> independently.
>>>>
>>>> - James
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/
>>>
>>>
> 
> 
> -- 
> Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/
> 
> 

Reply via email to