Henry Story wrote:
Bill de hÓra then responded:
[[
-1. That is of no little value to a user of the spec. Also, do read what I said earlier in this thread - I'm not looking to resolve ambiguity, I'm looking to specify what's going to be ambiguous.
]]
To which I reply:
This is getting to be a very subtle distinction, and I am having trouble following.
If you allow multiple entries with the same id in a feed, there's no straightforward way to determine whether the feed provider has defective id distribution. All you do is say these entries represent states of the same thing.
If you don't allow multiple entries with the same id in a feed, then feeds become a special aggregation case since you almost certainly want to allow multiple entries with the same id across feeds.
This has to do with webarch because the use case for multiple representations (entries) carried inside other representation (feeds) and from multiple authorities aren't covered by it, and bring up such issues as the above, eg, I have no idea whether Atom/RSS represents a new layer above or an extension to, current app protocols. Aside from overall architecture I sepculate that can be expected to have implications for trust, caching, security and design of implementations. So far we've only really talked about the effect on client aggregators in presenting entries to users. *
What's subtle about that? :)
cheers Bill
* This is the point where I start to see where Rob Sayre is coming from with WebDAV.
