On 16/5/05 11:28 PM, "Graham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 16 May 2005, at 2:02 pm, Eric Scheid wrote: >> what about comparing that entry against other entries? how do you >> sort a set of entries into chrono order? > > We have atom:updated and atom:published for that.
if you want to sort by updated or published, but not for most recently changed (even if not 'significantly') >>> The value does not need to correspond to any particular event in an >>> entries life-cycle. Suitable values include date of last >>> modification, or the date the atom:entry is generated by an Atom >>> producer. >>> >> >> does this mean that a dynamic system could cause the same entry to >> have a new modification date on every retrieval? > > i) It's not a modification date > ii) Yes. The point of atom:modified and atom:version is to > differentiate 2 different versions. Dynamic dates do that perfectly > well. What if the Archivist is not the Publisher? They will then see many many instances, all with different 'versions' ... are they to assume they are different versions/editions, and put each and every dynamic instance into the archive? e.
