On 10 May 2005, at 2:42 pm, Antone Roundy wrote:
Both the proposed text and the text that made it in say that the URI (or IRI) identifies or SHOULD identify the feed. The proposal says that the feed SHOULD be available from that xRI.
OK, fair enough. But the other reasons I gave are far more important.
Was not "self" added largely/primarily to enable feed readers that didn't get the information about the IRI from which a feed was retrieved to subscribe to it? Did we not discuss standard behavior when obtaining a feed from a different IRI being automatically switching to the "self" value when accessing it in the future? See http://www.imc.org/atom-syntax/mail-archive/msg12176.html for example.
The model was that the browser downloaded the file, and the OS sent a system event to the feed reader asking it to open the file. If I received such a system event, I'd look for the rel="self" in the file and subscribe to that address.
This all works without looking at "self" in feeds that are already subscribed to, which would be entirely separate functionality and (apart from that message) hasn't been discussed on the list, as far as I remember.
Graham
