No, it means only that it's the server's responsibility to determine when atom:updated should be updated and when it shouldn't. If the server wishes to delegate that responsibility to the client, then that's fine.
- James Henry Story wrote: > [snip] > Completely disagree. > If the server controls atom:updated then what was the point of the whole > discussion of app:edited? > the client controls app:edited. It is the client who decides what if > there was a significant change. > The server controls app:edited. Any edit, changes app:edited. > > If you have it your way, then atom:updated will end up meaning > app:edited, which Tim Bray specifically mentioned he did not want in his > wiki example. > > Henry >
