Sounds like a good way to scope the discussion. All of this sounds reasonable.
On 5/21/05, A. Pagaltzis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > * Antone Roundy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-05-22 05:25]: > > Multiple authors: > > * Allow multiple atom:author elements per feed/entry > > * Keep atom:contributor > > * Leave "byline" or ordering of authors to an extension for > > those who need it > > +1 > > > Multiple instances of an entry in a feed document > > * Allow it > > * State that multiple entries originating in the same feed with > > the same atom:id are instances of the same entry [yes, they're > > SUPPOSED to be, even "REQUIRED" to be universally unique, but > > let's live in the real world] > > * Leave determination of whether entries originate in the same > > feed or not as an exercise for the reader (I don't see us > > agreeing on a method anytime in the near future) > > +1, particularly on the last issue. > > > Ordering of entry instances with the same atom:updated > > * Leave it to an extension for those who need it > > +1 > > > At that point, I'd hope that we could come up with a list of > > issues we'd like to have addressed, decide which to fix, and > > then work till those are fixed without bringing up a lot more > > along the way. > > +1 > > Regards, > -- > Aristotle > >
