James M Snell wrote:
Bob Wyman wrote:
Aristotle Pagaltzis wrote:
That issue is inheritance.
Let me give an example of problematic inheritance...
Some have suggested that there be a License that you can associate
with Atom feeds and entries. However, scoping becomes very
Bill de hÓra wrote:
As we have no processing model for this, my answer to Paul's question is
that feed level extensions do not inherit/cascade/scope over entry level
ones, irrespective of whether they're foreign or not, and that the best
way to think about atom:author is as a frozen accident.
On 22 Aug 2005, at 18:29, James M Snell wrote:
Bill de hÓra wrote:
As we have no processing model for this, my answer to Paul's
question is
that feed level extensions do not inherit/cascade/scope over entry
level
ones, irrespective of whether they're foreign or not, and that the
best
Bob Wyman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Paul Hoffman asked:
Does an informative extension that appears at the feed level
(as compared to in entries) indicate:
a) this information pertains to each entry
b) this information pertains to the feed itself
c) this information pertains to each
On Aug 21, 2005, at 1:42 PM, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
* Paul Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-08-21 21:55]:
Ah, I had missed that. This leads to a question for the mailing
list. Does an informative extension that appears at the feed
level (as compared to in entries) indicate:
d) completely
James M Snell wrote:
Second note to self: After thinking about this a bit more, I would
also need a way of specifying a null license (e.g. the lack of a license).
For instance, what if an entry that does not contain a license is
aggregated into a feed that has a license. The original
On 8/22/05, Bill de hÓra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As we have no processing model for this, my answer to Paul's question is
that feed level extensions do not inherit/cascade/scope over entry level
ones, irrespective of whether they're foreign or not, and that the best
way to think about
Sunday, August 21, 2005, 8:46:54 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
At 7:24 PM +0100 8/21/05, Peter Robinson wrote:
I do something similar, intending it to mean the location of the items
described by this feed (when there is a single location).
Ah, I had missed that. This leads to a question for the
* Paul Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-08-21 21:55]:
Ah, I had missed that. This leads to a question for the mailing
list. Does an informative extension that appears at the feed
level (as compared to in entries) indicate:
a) this information pertains to each entry
b) this information
Paul Hoffman asked:
Does an informative extension that appears at the feed level
(as compared to in entries) indicate:
a) this information pertains to each entry
b) this information pertains to the feed itself
c) this information pertains to each entry and to the feed itself
d) completely
At 5:10 PM -0400 8/21/05, Bob Wyman wrote:
I believe the correct answer is e:
e) Unless otherwise specified, this information pertains to the feed only.
Er, right. Change that list to:
a) this information pertains to each entry (unless otherwise specified)
b) this information pertains to
Paul Hoffman wrote:
At 7:24 PM +0100 8/21/05, Peter Robinson wrote:
I do something similar, intending it to mean the location of the items
described by this feed (when there is a single location).
Ah, I had missed that. This leads to a question for the mailing list.
Does an informative
At 3:35 PM -0700 8/21/05, James M Snell wrote:
IMHO, it depends entirely on how the extension is defined. The
various extensions I have put together (e.g. comments, expires,
etc), the metadata can be placed on the feed/source level but is
only relevant on the entry level (same model as
On 8/21/05, Paul Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 3:35 PM -0700 8/21/05, James M Snell wrote:
IMHO, it depends entirely on how the extension is defined. The
various extensions I have put together (e.g. comments, expires,
etc), the metadata can be placed on the feed/source level but is
Paul Hoffman wrote:
The crux of the question is: what happens when an extension that
does not specify the scope appears at the feed level?
Robert Sayre asked:
I'm not sure why this question is interesting. What sort of
application would need to know?
I ask:
What should an aggregate
* Paul Hoffman [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-08-22 01:00]:
The crux of the question is: what happens when an extension
that does not specify the scope appears at the feed level?
Let me step back to look at the larger issue for a moment.
That issue is inheritance.
atom:author is the only precedent
Aristotle Pagaltzis wrote:
That issue is inheritance.
Let me give an example of problematic inheritance...
Some have suggested that there be a License that you can associate
with Atom feeds and entries. However, scoping becomes very important in this
case because of some
A. Pagaltzis wrote:
And with that, getting back to your question, the answer seems
pretty clear: it depends on whether the extension element is more
like atom:contributor, ie defines a property which an entry may
or may not have, or more like atom:author, ie defines a property
that every entry
* Robin Cover [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-08-22 05:05]:
On Mon, 22 Aug 2005, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
That issue is inheritance.
atom:author is the only precedent for it in Atom.
If it in only precedent for it refers to inhertance, can
you explain the sense in which atom:author is the only
Bob Wyman wrote:
Aristotle Pagaltzis wrote:
That issue is inheritance.
Let me give an example of problematic inheritance...
Some have suggested that there be a License that you can associate
with Atom feeds and entries. However, scoping becomes very important in this
A. Pagaltzis wrote:
* Robin Cover [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-08-22 05:05]:
On Mon, 22 Aug 2005, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
That issue is inheritance.
atom:author is the only precedent for it in Atom.
If it in only precedent for it refers to inhertance, can
you explain the sense in
* James M Snell [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-08-22 05:30]:
Second note to self: After thinking about this a bit more, I
would also need a way of specifying a null license (e.g. the
lack of a license). For instance, what if an entry that does
not contain a license is aggregated into a feed that has
22 matches
Mail list logo
