Tim Bray wrote:
> I regularly make minor changes to the trailing part of long
> entries and decline to refresh the feed or the atom:updated date,
> specifically because I do not went each of the ten thousand or
> so newsreaders who fetch my feed to go and re-get the entry
> because I fixed a typo in paragraph 11.
It seems like you are concerned that people who see a change in your
feed will re-fetch the HTML? If this is your concern, then do as you do now
and don't refresh the feed unless you have a change that warrants an update
to atom:updated. This is totally up to you and support for atom:modified
wouldn't change that. There is no requirement that your feed change whenever
you modify your posts. Thus, there is nothing that stops you from pursuing
this policy. You are essentially arguing that the standard should force
everyone to have a blog that works in the manner that your blog works. That
is not reasonable. To argue that the standard should make it possible for
you to do things the way you want is quite reasonable. But, you should give
to others the same consideration you apparently demand from them.
bob wyman
