A few quick comments before I transition out of the office and head towards
home:
In principle I am +1 for pretty much any spec that has the potential of
unifying entries and feeds, and feel even more strongly for those that also
unify comments and trackbacks with entries and feeds. A number of similar
paces have been presented over time, and I must admit that I have not had
the time I would like in order to review each in turn, so for the moment I'm
going to make a few specific comments on PaceEntryOrder and will then try to
find a bit of time this evening to re-review the other proposals before
commenting in much more detail.
The pace page on the wiki has a few things on which I'd like to comment,
some could be typo-type errors, some could be conceptual bits I either don't
understand or perhaps just don't agree with :). We'll see. On with the list:
- The pace mentions atom:head in its 4.1.2 text, but my impression of the
pace is that it would deprecate atom:head.
- The pace, in its text for 4.1.2, mentions how a feed can have any number
of entry elements. From the example, however, my impression of the pace
would be that the feed must have one entries element, which can then in turn
have any number of entry elements. I'll state my preference further in this
email, but would appreciate some clarification on what is being proposed by
the pace.
- The pace, in its text for 4.1.2, states atom:contributor cardinality rules
in the "MUST NOT" style text that conflict with the schema-style text
There may be others worth noting, but I'm out of time for my initial review
pass and must head out of the office. I'll try to do another scan, including
a review of the other similar paces, later tonight if I have a bit of time.
In the meantime, a few more "out there" pieces of food for thought in
descending order of priority from my perspective:
- merge <entry> and <feed> into <item>, then merge child elements
- add a linking construct that can support "item detail by reference", ala
the following pseudo-markup example:
<item>
<items>
<item>
<title>...</title>
<updated>...</updated>
<link rel="detail" href="..." />
...
<item>
<link rel="detail" href="..." />
...
<item>
<link rel="detail" href="..." />
...
...
Whether via <link> or not, something like this would be very useful and
powerful indeed. May, as-is or with further refinement, handle Antone's
indirection desires.
- remove <entries>, hang children directly from the parent. If not, at least
rename it to match whatever "item"-related renaming might take place
- simmer
- enjoy
I'll see what I can do about setting aside some time to more clearly
document my thoughts, but figured it would at least be worthwhile providing
the above comments and food for thought. Since I've really scrambled to type
up this email and get out of the office, I've likely written some confusing
or outright erroneous text. If anyone has any questions or comments, don't
hesitate to contact me on-list or off. Even if I don't end up finding time
to help with the production of actual pace text, I'm more than happy to
discuss the involved issues.
Jeremy Gray
