Re: PaceCoConstraintsAreBad

[Antone Roundy]

On Wednesday, April 6, 2005, at 08:40  PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
My order of preference:
  PaceFeedIdOrAlternate
  PaceFeedIdOrSelf
  Current Text
  PaceCoConstraintsAreBad
To summarize what elements would be required under each, all four 
require atom:title and atom:updated. Additionally:

Current Text: Requires atom:[EMAIL PROTECTED]"alternate"].
PaceFeedIdOrAlternate: Requires either atom:[EMAIL PROTECTED]"alternate"] or 
atom:id.
PaceFeedIdOrSelf: Requires either atom:[EMAIL PROTECTED]"self"] or atom:id.
PaceCoConstraintsAreBad: SHOULD have atom:[EMAIL PROTECTED]"alternate"]; 
Requires atom:id and atom:author? (the abstract says so, but the 
proposed text doesn't).

My preferences (which, below the first one, shifted as I typed my 
comments below--score one for "principled reasoning"):

PaceFeedIdOrSelf
PaceCoConstraintsAreBad
PaceFeedIdOrAlternate
Current Text
Comments:
* PaceFeedIdOrSelf: atom:id and atom:[EMAIL PROTECTED]"self"] are somewhat 
interchangable as feed identifiers.

* PaceCoConstraintsAreBad: less change at this point in time would be 
more comfortable, and I'm undecided about atom:author...which is okay, 
because the Pace is too ;^). But it's probably an improvement over the 
current situation.

* PaceFeedIdOrAlternate: atom:id and atom:[EMAIL PROTECTED]"alternate"] don't 
seem to me to fill similar enough roles to be alternative requirements, 
but at least atom:[EMAIL PROTECTED]"alternate"] wouldn't be absolutely required

* Current Text: Requiring atom:[EMAIL PROTECTED]"alternate"] just seems 
unnecessary, and is unreasonable in some cases