Yep. Good.. I just wanted to make sure I wasn't making any baseless assumptions with this. sounds like I'm safe.
- James Antone Roundy wrote: > > On 10 Mar 2006, at 18:44, James M Snell wrote: >> If the feeds have the same atom:id, I would submit that they form a >> single logical feed. Meaning that all of the feed documents in an >> incremental feed (using Mark's Feed History terminology) SHOULD use the >> same atom:id value. This is the way I have implemented paging in our >> APP implementation. If the linked feeds have different atom:id values, >> they should represent different logical feeds. > > Agreed. From 4.2.6: > > "Put another way, an atom:id element > pertains to all instantiations of a particular Atom entry or feed; > revisions retain the same content in their atom:id elements." > > All the Atom Feed Documents representing one incremental feed (or parts > of one incremental feed) are "instantiations of a particular Atom ... > feed", are they not? So they should have the same value in atom:id. If > they don't, then they can't be considered instantiations of the same > Atom feed. > >
