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: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 13:19:35 +0200
Message-ID: <4BC847C7.9010808@gmx.de>
To: Edward O'Connor <hober0@gmail.com>
CC: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>
On 16.04.2010 01:19, Edward O'Connor wrote:
> ...
> I actually prefer #1 too, but am willing to meet Julian half-way
> (dropping<entry>s with unstable IDs). I'm opposed to not generating an
> Atom feed at all in such cases, which is what Julian originally
> proposed:
>
> [[
> "The same absolute URL must be generated for each run of this algorithm
> when given the same input. If this requirement can not be fulfilled,
> then generating a valid Atom feed is not possible and this algorithm
> should be aborted."
> ]] -- http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Apr/0193.html
>
> Julian wrote:
>> Anyway, we already have two change proposals; one for dropping the
>> section completely, one for fixing just the two issues I spotted. Do
>> you want to make a third one?
> ...

I have no problem with just dropping problematic entries; on the other 
hand I'd be surprised if it makes a big difference in practice, where 
the pages are generated from a datasource, so the individual articles 
will likely have all an ID, or none of them.

Best regards, Julian
Received on Friday, 16 April 2010 11:20:17 GMT

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