Bob Wyman wrote:
Thomas Broyer wrote in response to Bill de h�ra:
If an entry already has an atom:source child, you just republish it as-is. [And, if it doesn't have an atom:source, you insert one.]
This is what was agreed, I believe, when the issue was discussed on
the list. To do anything more would be addressing the "path" or "provenance"
issue (i.e. answering "How did this get here?"). The source element is only intended to provide that data which would
have been available to a reader if the entry had been found in its source
feed. Any other data that might be interesting (and there is a great deal of
it) is the problem of some other element to handle.
Ok. The format spec ought to document what is expected to happen downstream in the event of repeated aggregations.
cheers Bill
