Here's another thought. Thus far, we've talked about
next/previous/first/last links appearing on the atom:feed element... used
as a means of linking Atom Feed Documents together. These same link
relations could be used on atom:entry as well.... used as a way of
creating a linked list of Atom Entry Documents.
Interesting thought, but if it doesn't have anything to do with feed
history, would it not be best to set it aside for later and concentrate on
getting the history spec out the door? The issues I think we still have left
to resolve are:
1. Which relationship, next or prev, is used to specify a link backwards in
time to an older archive. Mark Nottingham's Feed History proposal used prev.
Mark Pilgrim's XML.com article used next.
2. Are next and prev both needed in the spec if we only require one of them
to reconstruct the full history?
3. Are the first/last relationships needed?
4. Is the order of the entries in a feed relevant to this proposal?
5. Is the issue of whether a feed is incremental or not (the fh:incremental
element) relevant to this proposal?
6. What to name the link relation that points to the active feed document?
subscribe, subscription, self, something else?
My answers would be:
1. I prefer "next" pointing back in time (as per Pilgrim).
2. I would make the one that points back in time MUST, and the one the
points forwards in time MAY.
3. No to both.
4. No.
5. No.
6. subscribe
Is there anything I've left out?
Regards
James
