Re: Introduction to The Atom Syndication Format

2005-08-15 Thread Robert Sayre

On 8/15/05, Bob Wyman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> I suggest that the Introduction cover atom:source in the "recommended"
> section and highlight the case in which it is recommended.

Disagree. The introduction is for newbies. Folks implementing
synthetic feed services (the case in which it is recommended) have to
read the real spec.

Robert Sayre



RE: Introduction to The Atom Syndication Format

2005-08-15 Thread Bob Wyman

The "Introduction to The Atom Syndication Format" indicates that atom:source
is an "optional" element of atom:entry. While this is indicated by the "MAY"
in the first sentence of the specification's description of atom:source, the
second sentence, by using "SHOULD", would seem to indicate that in some
circumstances, atom:source is a recommended element. The text I refer to is:

4.2.11: "Such metadata SHOULD be preserved if the source atom:feed contains
any of the child elements atom:author, atom:contributor, atom:rights, or
atom:category and those child elements are not present in the source
atom:entry."

I suggest that the Introduction cover atom:source in the "recommended"
section and highlight the case in which it is recommended.

bob wyman


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Sam Ruby
Sent: Monday, August 01, 2005 10:39 PM
To: atom-syntax@imc.org
Subject: Introduction to The Atom Syndication Format


http://www.atomenabled.org/developers/syndication/

Feedback welcome.

- Sam Ruby





RE: Introduction to The Atom Syndication Format

2005-08-03 Thread Hammond, Tony

Hi Sam:

This is very a nice summary. Would just query the words:

"If you own your own Internet domain,"

Was my understanding that domain names were leased, not owned. One of the
Internet's dirty little secrets.

Cheers,

Tony


> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Danny Ayers
> Sent: 02 August 2005 14:09
> To: Sam Ruby
> Cc: atom-syntax@imc.org
> Subject: Re: Introduction to The Atom Syndication Format
> 
> 
> 
> Looks great.
> 
> My only suggestion would be to expose the MUSTs etc. little 
> more, especially where Atom differees from RSS. E.g. right 
> now it would be easy for someone coming from RSS 2.0 to think 
> that  was the same as .
> 
> So in this case maybe:
> Identifies the feed in a universally unique and permanent 
> way. => Identifies the feed in a universally unique and 
> permanent way, using an IRI. or perhaps Identifies the feed 
> in a universally unique and permanent way, according to rfc3987.
> 
> Cheers,
> Danny.
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> http://dannyayers.com
> 


   
DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is confidential and should not be used by anyone who is
not the original intended recipient. If you have received this e-mail in error
please inform the sender and delete it from your mailbox or any other storage
mechanism. Neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its agents accept
liability for any statements made which are clearly the sender's own and not
expressly made on behalf of Macmillan Publishers Limited or one of its agents.
Please note that neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its agents
accept any responsibility for viruses that may be contained in this e-mail or
its attachments and it is your responsibility to scan the e-mail and 
attachments (if any). No contracts may be concluded on behalf of Macmillan 
Publishers Limited or its agents by means of e-mail communication. Macmillan 
Publishers Limited Registered in England and Wales with registered number 
785998 
Registered Office Brunel Road, Houndmills, Basingstoke RG21 6XS   




Re: Introduction to The Atom Syndication Format

2005-08-02 Thread Danny Ayers

Looks great.

My only suggestion would be to expose the MUSTs etc. little more,
especially where Atom differees from RSS. E.g. right now it would be
easy for someone coming from RSS 2.0 to think that  was the same
as .

So in this case maybe:
Identifies the feed in a universally unique and permanent way.
=>
Identifies the feed in a universally unique and permanent way, using an IRI.
or perhaps
Identifies the feed in a universally unique and permanent way,
according to rfc3987.

Cheers,
Danny.


-- 

http://dannyayers.com



Re: Oversights? (Re: Introduction to The Atom Syndication Format)

2005-08-02 Thread Graham


On 2 Aug 2005, at 5:41 am, James Cerra wrote:




  http://example.com/


http://example.com/



Those are different ids ("Processors MUST compare atom:id elements on  
a character-by-character basis"), and the first is just plain  
invalid. Why on earth would you think otherwise?


(oh, apparently because the feed validator is broken)

Graham



Re: Introduction to The Atom Syndication Format

2005-08-01 Thread Eric Scheid

On 2/8/05 12:38 PM, "Sam Ruby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> http://www.atomenabled.org/developers/syndication/
> 
> Feedback welcome.

" is patterned after html's link element. "
[...]
"rel indicates the link relationship type. "

It would be good to indicate that atom:rel is different from html's rel in
that only one value is allowed, not a space-delimited list.

e.



Re: Introduction to The Atom Syndication Format

2005-08-01 Thread Roger B.

Sam: I've only given it a quick skim, but at first blush, I think it
looks great.

--
Roger Benningfield

On 8/1/05, Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> http://www.atomenabled.org/developers/syndication/
> 
> Feedback welcome.
> 
> - Sam Ruby



Oversights? (Re: Introduction to The Atom Syndication Format)

2005-08-01 Thread James Cerra

> Sam Ruby annoyed us with:
> 
> http://www.atomenabled.org/developers/syndication/
> 
> Feedback welcome.

Interesting examples.  I'm probably missing a few things, so any clarifications
filling the gaps in my head would be appreciated!  :-)

>From the Atom spec that I scanned (10) it is unclear if white space in atom:id
and atom:updated elements (among others) is significant.  The only mention is
where the type attribute is allowed, where white space is sometimes
normalizable.  Strictly following the spec, then the following would be
different atom:ids right?


  http://example.com/


http://example.com/

Of course that's not what's wanted.  What is reasonable is that they are the
same atom:id.  However normalizing the whitespace is not enough, or even
wanted.  What is required is specifying that leading and trailing whitespaces
are not significant.

Also, the atom:content Processing Model specifies that new lines must be
U+000A.  What about Mac/Windows/other new line conventions?

P.S. Just kidding about the annoying thing.  I actually thought it was
insightful!


--
Jimmy Cerra
https://nemo.dev.java.net




__ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. 
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail



Introduction to The Atom Syndication Format

2005-08-01 Thread Sam Ruby

http://www.atomenabled.org/developers/syndication/

Feedback welcome.

- Sam Ruby