On Dec 4, 2006, at 10:12 PM, Mark Baker wrote:
On 12/4/06, James M Snell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
All I can go on is evidence of how folks are actually using 'em...
and
they ain't using 'em as aliases. :-)
Ok, I'll take empirical evidence too 8-) Point the way ...
Question: what does
When I process this entry,
http://www.google.com/calendar/feeds/jasnell%40gmail.com/public/basic/10ge5k2k7c488algfbau5q9qc0
What is the implied feed? Where do I get the implied feeds metadata?
Title? ID? Anything? If the entry contained an atom:source element you
might be able to assume that
On Dec 5, 2006, at 9:15 PM, James M Snell wrote:
When I process this entry,
http://www.google.com/calendar/feeds/jasnell%40gmail.com/public/
basic/10ge5k2k7c488algfbau5q9qc0
Funny, Safari switches to feed://www.google.com :-)
And then says it cannot process the entity (presumably
Mark Baker wrote:
On 12/4/06, James M Snell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
All I can go on is evidence of how folks are actually using 'em... and
they ain't using 'em as aliases. :-)
Ok, I'll take empirical evidence too 8-) Point the way ...
Mark,
since you introduced it, what's an alias,
James M Snell wrote:
When I process this entry,
http://www.google.com/calendar/feeds/jasnell%40gmail.com/public/basic/10ge5k2k7c488algfbau5q9qc0
I had problems subscribing to that entry in bloglines. Will somebody
file a bug?
cheers
Bill
Indeed. The application was written to expect a feed because of the
content-type but gets an entry instead and blows up.
- James
Jan Algermissen wrote:
On Dec 5, 2006, at 9:15 PM, James M Snell wrote:
When I process this entry,
Edward O'Connor wrote:
Robert Sayre wrote:
Don't move forward with the autodiscovery draft.
[...]
At this point there seems to be no reason for the autodiscovery draft
to exist, since the WHAT-WG has ably covered the subject in Web
Applications 1.0.
I am worried that there are three
On 12/5/06, Jan Algermissen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Question: what does it mean (what do we have to look for) to use them
as aliases??
It wasn't the most illustrative choice of words, but what I'm looking
for is evidence that an entry is interpreted differently if it's found
in an entry
On 12/5/06, James M Snell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When I process this entry,
http://www.google.com/calendar/feeds/jasnell%40gmail.com/public/basic/10ge5k2k7c488algfbau5q9qc0
What is the implied feed? Where do I get the implied feeds metadata?
Title? ID? Anything? If the entry contained an
Mark Baker wrote:
[snip]
Ok, but I don't see that this would necessitate a new media type.
It's just an entry without a feed. You'd use the same code path to
process that entry whether it were found in an entry or feed document,
right?
Not necessarily. Sure, it might be the same
On 6/12/06 3:52 PM, James M Snell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not necessarily. Sure, it might be the same parser code, but not
necessarily the same bit of code using the parser. Look at the way
Firefox, IE7, Bloglines, Liferea, etc all handle (or don't handle) Entry
documents versus Feed
Lisa ran in to me today and reminded me about the meet up (thanks!). I
will try hard to make it; is there a definite time set? (6pm is
slightly better for me, but 7pm is okay too.)
-John
Lisa Dusseault wrote:
Thanks for setting this up Henry, I can be there Dec 6. 7pm is much
easier to make
On 12/5/06, James M Snell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mark Baker wrote:
[snip]
Ok, but I don't see that this would necessitate a new media type.
It's just an entry without a feed. You'd use the same code path to
process that entry whether it were found in an entry or feed document,
right?
I'll be there at 6:30pm then. I imagine people will not be wanting to
stay very late.
Henry
On 5 Dec 2006, at 21:26, John Panzer wrote:
Lisa ran in to me today and reminded me about the meet up
(thanks!). I will try hard to make it; is there a definite time
set? (6pm is slightly
Mark Baker wrote:
[snip]
Isn't that just a case of people not implementing the whole spec
though? FWIW, if that practice is widespread, then I think the group
should consider deprecating entry documents. Minting a new media type
won't help.
The interesting question is *why* haven't
Eric Scheid wrote:
[snip]
If an agent found an entry document, should it assume that it's a feed with
one entry (so far) and allocate resources accordingly (ie. allow for
cardinality of n++)?
No. In particular, if an atom:source element is not included there is no
way of knowing anything
On 6/12/06 5:06 PM, James M Snell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Would an agent finding multiple atom:content elements inside the one entry
consider that a problem (other than it being a spec violation)?
Are XML processors optimised for the fact that any given attribute can only
occur once per
On 12/5/06, James M Snell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mark Baker wrote:
[snip]
Ok, but I don't see that this would necessitate a new media type.
It's just an entry without a feed. You'd use the same code path to
process that entry whether it were found in an entry or feed document,
18 matches
Mail list logo
