On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 9:49 PM, Tim Bray <[email protected]> wrote: > > I think there needs to be quite a bit more clarity here. It's clear > that the hub is required to preserve the atom:id. How about the other > elements? I would be *very* nervous about a hub that screwed around > with my atom:updated or other header fields. The current text sounds > like it's suggesting that it might be OK for hubs to do this. If so, > that's going to surprise some users of this spec, so it should be made > very clear.
My response to this would be, if you don't like how a Hub screws with your content, then don't use that hub to distribute your data. As the publisher, you own your own feed. You set up your delegation to one or more hubs to do distribution on your behalf. Hubs may provide a lot of extra value (stats, translation, normalization) that you are interested in, but you can decide with your "hub" link. Does that make sense? Is there anything that would clarify this in the spec? It's really important to realize that publishers are always in control of their own content here. -Brett
