On 6/11/05 10:08 AM, "James M Snell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The server could choose to order that set according to the date/time the entry > was last modified, but doing so does not require the introduction of a new > extension element. -1 > Regarding the extension element, I don't feel it is necessary. If I want to > know when a member resource was last modified, I could do a HEAD request on > the member URI and look at the Last-Modified header. -1 If the collection feed from the server is sorted by last modified, but there is no indication of that, what happens in this scenario: Client connects to server, wanting to sync, knowing it last sync 7 days ago. Client requests the most recent page of the collection feed, the server sends it, and the client sees that the document contains entries more recent than 7 days and so surmises there might be more entries to fetch. Client requests the next older page of the collection feed, and this time all the entries have atom:updated older than 7 days. At this point, can the client surmise that it does not need to request yet another page of entries? Note: 1) ignore the order of the entries within any given feed document 2) entries can be modified without changing the atom:updated element 3) doing a HEAD on every collection member in a given feed document retrieved would/should be considered wasteful 4) retrieving the entire collection, going back possibly hundreds of pages, would/should also be considered wasteful 5) it should just damn work, no need to open a conversation out of band e.
