Antone Roundy asked:
> Category feeds: ... Should they, or feeds that combine category
> feeds present the entries like aggregated feeds?
Yes, at least normally. An entry should have only one "source."
On a site that has a "master" feed and also provides copies of
entries in a variety of category feeds, I feel that the "master" feed should
be the source and things in the category feeds should be copies which
contain atom:source elements pointing to the master. Of course, you could
reasonably do it the other way around, however, for a variety of reasons I
think that would be less then optimal.
One thing you should not do with category feeds is "tag" things
simply by putting them in one feed or another. If you have a feed for things
that are in category "foobar" then each entry which is in the "foobar" feed
should also have an atom:category element with the value "foobar." The entry
should standalone and be associated with the same category or categories no
matter which feed it is found in.
> Should we add an "authoritative" link type, as recently discussed,
> and change this wording to work with that?
It would be great if we could permit one feed to subordinate itself
to another, however, I don't that would really change the fact that there
really should be only one source for an entry.
> Search results feeds: more difficult. If the search criteria don't
> change, then it's the same feed, so the prior sentence applies.
I'm not sure what you're getting at here. However, it seems to me
that a search results feed is almost always going to be an aggregate feed
and thus should be filled with entries that have source elements identifying
other feeds.
But, I suspect that I haven't understood properly what you were
trying to say. Please try rephrasing.
bob wyman
