On 21/5/05 10:48 AM, "Tim Bray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't see why, if you wanted that kind of archive, you couldn't use > atom:updated for every little change in the archived version but > atom:updated only for the ones you cared about in the published > version. In which case the archived version would be a superset of the > published version. I see nothing wrong with that. -Tim > but how would the publisher signal the particular instances in that archive which are 'significant' while others are not? e.
