Ryan, Rather than trying to get into too detailed a discussion over email I'll try to catch you in irc some time. Email isn't the best forum for the resolution of technical questions :)
I'll just summarise my main feelings at this time: * The hAtom specification does not define any child elements of a class=feed element, except for class=entry elements. The specification is at a tipping point where the additional feed-level elements could all be defined or all be left out. I lean towards the latter, except for the definitions of the required <atom:id> and <atom:updated> fields. These are the only things missing from the current specification required to translate hAtom to valid Atom. * I think that the <atom:entry> concept is more important than the <atom:feed> and is in a good state in the current hAtom. I think defining the set of elements for <atom:feed> may be a case of diminishing returns. I will do some more thinking about how feeds would work in the examples currently available. I am in two minds as to whether I feel they should be available for use or not. It seems reasonable to be able to define disjoint feeds on a single page, but these would have to be addressable using id attributes for parsers to subscribe to them. Nested feeds would not be supported, but categorisation within a single feed could affect ordering and presentation in a client such as a feed reader. On Mon, 2005-12-26 at 08:43 -0600, Ryan King wrote: > On Dec 26, 2005, at 12:05 AM, Benjamin Carlyle wrote: > > I have been thinking a little about what feeds are and what they > > will be > > used for. Currently my own mostly-hAtom-formatted blog[1] has no feed > > element. Essentially, the page is the feed. Are feed elements useful? > > Are they required? I have been having the following arguments with > > myself. ... -- Benjamin Carlyle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ microformats-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
