--On August 30, 2005 1:49:57 AM -0400 Bob Wyman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I’m sorry, but I can’t go on without complaining. Microsoft has proposed > extensions which turn RSS V2.0 feeds into lists and we’ve got folk who are > proposing much the same for Atom (i.e. stateful, incremental or partitioned > feeds)… I think they are wrong. Feeds aren’t lists and Lists aren’t feeds. The Atom spec says: This specification assigns no significance to the order of atom:entry elements within the feed. One could read that to mean that feeds are fundamentally unordered or that Atom doesn't say what the order means. Other RSS formats are ordered, either implicitly or explicity (RSS 1.0). For interoperatility, lots of software is going to treat Atom as ordered. Otherwise, it is not possible to go from Atom to RSS 1.0. > What is a search engine or a matching engine supposed to return as a resul > if it find a match for a user query in an entry that comes from a list-feed? Maybe the list feed should have a noindex flag. > Should it return the entire feed or should it return just the entry/item > that contained the stuff in the users’ query? I'd return the entry. It is all about the entries. If the list position is semantically important to the entry, then include a link from the entry to the list. "This is movie 312 in wunder's queue." wunder -- Walter Underwood Principal Software Architect, Verity
