Bill de h�ra wrote:
> I'm going to think about it some more but atm I'm not sure what you're
> proposing helps against DOS.
My proposal says that things are considered the same only if found
in the same feed. This is, I believe, the only way to prevent someone from
maliciously erasing someone else's entries with a blocking entry having the
same ID as the entry under attack. Admittedly, the approach will lead to a
number of false negatives in comparisons if people do not consistently
publish "self" links when they build synthetic feeds. The only way I can see
to improve on this situation is to support the "rel='superset'" link that I
discussed earlier. If the superset relationship can, in fact, be expressed,
the rule would change to:
atom:feed elements MUST NOT contain atom:entry elements with identical
atom:id values unless each such entry contains an atom:source element which
is different from that of any of the other entries with which the entry
shares identical atom:id values.
Two atom:source elements MUST only be considered different if they each
contain an atom:link element with a rel value of "self" which identifies
different feed URIs and neither of the feeds identified is known to be a
'superset' of the other feed. A superset feed is identified in a subset feed
by a link element with rel value of "superset". Synthetic feed generators
and aggregators MAY use other sources of information, public or private, to
determine the relationships between feeds.
If two atom:feed elements have identical atom:id values yet only one of them
has an atom:source element with a rel value of "self", that element which
contains the atom:source element with rel value of "self" SHOULD be
preferred over the other.
bob wyman
