On 10/18/05, Mark Nottingham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm confused; the current proposal (below) doesn't have that text in > it; for example, the definition of previous is:
OK, then I am confused. > > > A stable URI that, when dereferenced, returns a feed document > > containing a set of entries that sequentially precede those in the > > current document. I already have code that uses "next" for this. Why do we want to change it? > > This can be thought of as specific to those > > entries; in other words, it represents a fixed section of the feed, > > rather than a sliding window over it. Note that the exact nature of > > the ordering between the entries and documents containing them is > > not defined by this relation; i.e., this relation is only relative. 1.) I don't understand why one feed is making assertions about the stability of another, when your draft provides explicit signals for this. 2.) I still don't see how this helps me write a client. 3.) I don't think the notion of "fixed section" is helpful. <fh:archive> is good, that means "don't subscribe"... I get that. Robert Sayre
