On May 20, 2005, at 5:07 PM, Graham wrote:
Tim, can I ask about your thinking regarding the use of atom:updated in PaceDuplicateIDs. What if someone (either the publisher or someone downstream) wants to store a history of every revision in an archive feed? atom:updates forces one to choose only one version per "significant" change. The mechanism it affords (being able to automatically display the newest version) is vital, but it doesn't seem like the best way to do it.
I don't see why, if you wanted that kind of archive, you couldn't use atom:updated for every little change in the archived version but atom:updated only for the ones you cared about in the published version. In which case the archived version would be a superset of the published version. I see nothing wrong with that. -Tim
