I also noticed the split that Lisa mentions when reviewing the draft.
I agree that they're not always separate, but it should be pointed
out that they can be separate. I didn't see any mechanism to discover
what the URI of the "normal" feed is, beyond a link/@rel=alternate in
the collection feed; did I miss something?
If that's the way to do it, it would be good to call it out (it might
be preferable to have a separate link relation, as the semantic isn't
just "alternate", but "public", etc.). It might also be good to have
something that allows distinguishing between the two (without forcing
it) in the service document.
Cheers,
On 2006/10/17, at 4:40 PM, James M Snell wrote:
My assumption: The separation between "subscription feeds" and
"collection feeds" is not always clear. There are at least two
deployed
implementations I am aware of that use the same feeds for both and I'm
currently working on a third. In Google's new Blogger Beta, for
instance, the subscription feed is also the collection feed.
I believe that any assumption that the subscription and collections
feeds will always be different is incorrect and dangerous.
--
Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
