On Monday, January 31, 2005, at 08:51 PM, Robert Sayre wrote:
Graham wrote:
Both proposals suck equally. HeadInEntry is surprisingly elegant when you get to thinking about it.
My preferences are as follows:
1.) PaceFeedRecursive w/ indirection at atom:feed, atom:entry, and atom:content
2.) RDF (instead of the fake RDF in #4)
3.) "add an attribute to atom:entry that indicates whether it refers to an instance of entry or another feed"
4.) current draft (head in entry and all that)
5.) PaceAggregationDocument
Robert Sayre
My preferences:
+1: Current draft or PaceAggregationDocument (with or without atom:feed/atom:head and with or without metadata for atom:aggregation (atom:aggregation/atom:head?))
+0.5: PaceFeedRecursive without any more indirection than we already have, and only one level of recursion
-0.8: Real RDF
-1: PaceFeedRecursive as it stands (no extra indirection, but unlimited levels of recursion)
-1.5: "add an attribute to atom:entry that indicates whether it refers to an instance of entry or another feed"
-2: PaceFeedRecursive w/ indirection at atom:feed, atom:entry, and atom:content
