On 12 May 2005, at 23:22, Eric Scheid wrote:
On 13/5/05 7:12 AM, Henry Story [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just to recapitulate: we have 2 feed documents with successive
atom updated
values, and with the same entry (same id) with the same time
stamp but some
values that are not identical. Does
Gah! What is the true atom:updated for the following entry?
feed
updated2005-05-12T02:22:59+/updated
author.../author
copyright.../copyright
entry
updated2005-05-11T01:11:59+/updated
id.../id
summary.../summary
title.../title
/entry
Gah! What is the true atom:updated for the following entry?
Eric: The entry-level version, IMO.
--
Roger Benningfield
On Thursday, May 12, 2005, at 12:20 PM, Thomas Broyer wrote:
Eric Scheid wrote:
Gah! What is the true atom:updated for the following entry?
feed
updated2005-05-12T02:22:59+/updated
author.../author
copyright.../copyright
entry
updated2005-05-11T01:11:59+/updated
On 13/5/05 4:39 AM, Antone Roundy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Eric, was your point that the entry might be inheriting data from the
feed which was updated after the entry was updated, and therefore, the
entry might be thought of as having been updated after it's atom:updated
timestamp? Other
On 12 May 2005, at 18:49, Eric Scheid wrote:
On 13/5/05 2:04 AM, Roger B. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gah! What is the true atom:updated for the following entry?
Eric: The entry-level version, IMO.
What if an atom processor had previously seen that entry with that
atom:updated ... should it do
On 13/5/05 7:12 AM, Henry Story [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just to recapitulate: we have 2 feed documents with successive atom updated
values, and with the same entry (same id) with the same time stamp but some
values that are not identical. Does the newer feed document trump the older
one?
Eric Scheid wrote:
I agree. You can see how easy it would be to not do that though. It could
also be argued that the publisher has signalled the significance by updating
/feed/updated, and thus effectively /feed/entry/. The ambiguity bothers me.
thus effectively, does not follow. That's not
