On 5/19/05, Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 
> Of course, breaking any link in my complicated chain of logic above
> would cause the whole argument to collapse, which would be fine with me.

Maybe the requirement is useless.

"If multiple atom:entry elements with the same atom:id value appear in
an Atom Feed document, they describe the same entry and software MUST
treat them as such."

"MUST treat them as such" isn't particularly meaningful, and two
atom:entry elements occuring anywhere are supposed to be describing
the same entry. When I get CCed on an atom-syntax message, some of my
email programs show two messages, and some show one. It's a
security/annoyance trade-off, and I don't see why the format should be
making that decision.

Robert Sayre

Reply via email to