On 10/09/2007, David Janes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 9/10/07, Frances Berriman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Aye - it's that slip of the tongue which seems all too common when > > discussing posting dates that causes the confusion, in my opinion. > > Published and updated tend to be rather interchangeable terms for > > authors. > > > > As for the inconsistency - I'm not sure to be honest. I assume it's > > an over-sight on the contributors part. If no one has any clear > > reason why it should say one thing in one place, and another somewhere > > else, then I'd advise it to be clarified to match our conversation > > here. > > I'm not sure what you're saying about the honest part. > > Atom entries MUST have "updated" [1]. Many blogging tools (blogger, > for example) only provide "published" and most templates we have seen > only use "published". Thus this is the way we get the hAtom rules. > > If there's an inconsistency in the hAtom spec, please point it out and > I'll work on correcting it. > > Regards, etc... > > [1] http://www.atomenabled.org/developers/syndication/#requiredEntryElements >
There is... reffering back to Michaels original post.. http://microformats.org/wiki/hatom#Schema says "updated. required using datetime-design-pattern." whereas http://microformats.org/wiki/hatom#Entry_Updated says "an Entry SHOULD have an Entry Updated element" The first suggests a must and the second a should. It's just a bit confusing, so any help to iron that out would be fabulous. :) -- Frances Berriman http://fberriman.com _______________________________________________ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
