W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2010

Re: change proposal for issue-86, was: ISSUE-86 - atom-id-stability - Chairs Solicit Proposals

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 13:31:27 -0400
Message-ID: <4BC74D6F.6000507@intertwingly.net>
To: "Edward O'Connor" <hober0@gmail.com>
CC: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>
On 04/15/2010 12:43 PM, Edward O'Connor wrote:
>
> Sam wrote:
>> One possible way to address this is for section 5.5.3, step 15, substep 9,
>> otherwise clause be modified to throw an INVALID_STATE_ERR exception if it
>> is not possible to generate an entry id in a way that ensures uniqueness.
>
> Suppose there's an HTML document with several<article>s, only one of
> which triggers the "otherwise" clause of step 15, substep 9. Instead of
> throwing an exception and aborting--not producing any feed at all--why
> not just leave out that one problematic<atom:entry>  from the resulting
> feed? So instead of "or ... you don't produce an Atom feed," we don't
> produce an Atom *entry* for that specific<article>.

Sounds plausible.  This, however, suggests that algorithm isn't fully 
"baked" yet, and would benefit from some implementation experience 
and/or integration with such efforts as hAtom as alluded to by Tantek[1] 
before being put forward for consideration for inclusion in HTML5.

- Sam Ruby

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Apr/0476.html
Received on Thursday, 15 April 2010 17:32:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:07 GMT