On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 8:54 AM, Ed Summers <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 10:58 PM, Bob Wyman <[email protected]> wrote:.
>> I would strongly encourage you to ensure that deleted-entry is symmetrical
>> with atom:entry and that it is available in all contexts (i.e. both within
>> and without a Feed Document) that an Atom entry is. Just as we can have
>> Entry Documents, we should be able to have Deleted-entry Documents.
>
> +1
>
> I could well imagine wanting to return a Tombstone as the message body
> for a 403 Gone response for a resource that I know has been deleted.
+1 from me as well.
Apart from the use cases already mentioned (XMPP, 403
representations), I see potential for using deleted-entry documents in
our system (the swedish legal information system). I'm currently using
entry documents internally in our "depot", both as manifests and to
represent the collected source entries ("via" entries). Having
deleted-entry documents there as well would be very beneficial.
(In fact, this was a primary motive for my wish for allowing
atom:source in at:deleted-entry elements. Which I'm very happy to see
in the latest draft -- thanks James!)
Two points come to mind if this is done:
* What would the mime-type for deleted-entry documents be? A new
"application/atom+xml;type=deleted-entry"?
* For good measure, making sure that this doesn't lead to a pattern of
PUT:ing deleted-entry docs instead of using DELETE... ;)
Best regards,
Niklas
