At first I really liked this proposal, but I think that the kind of confusion you're concerned about is unavoidable; the terms you refer to suffer "bottom-up" vs. "top-down."
I think that defining the terms well and in relation to the subscription feed will help; after all, the terms don't surface in UIs, so it should be transparent.
On 14/10/2005, at 10:37 AM, Antone Roundy wrote:
Which brings me back to "top", "bottom", "up" and "down". In the OpenSearch case, it's clear which end the "top" results are going to be found. In the syndication feed case, the convention is to put the most recent entries at the "top". If you think of a feed as a stack, new entries are stacked on "top". The fact that these terms are less generic and flexible than "previous" and "next" is both an advantage and a disadvantage. I think the question is whether it's an advantage in a significant majority of cases or not. What orderings would those terms not work well for?
-- Mark Nottingham Principal Technologist Office of the CTO BEA Systems ________________________________________________________________________________ BEAWorld 2005: coming to a city near you. Everything you need for SOA and enterprise infrastructure success. Register now at http://www.bea.com/4beaworld London 11-12 Oct| Paris13-14 Oct| Prague18-19 Oct |Tokyo 25-26 Oct| Beijing 7-8 Dec
