This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 9546 - computing atom:updated
Summary: computing atom:updated
Status: VERIFIED INVALID
Alias: None
Product: HTML WG
Classification: Unclassified
Component: pre-LC1 HTML5 spec (editor: Ian Hickson) (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: PC Windows NT
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Ian 'Hixie' Hickson
QA Contact: HTML WG Bugzilla archive list
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords: NE
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2010-04-17 10:13 UTC by Julian Reschke
Modified: 2010-12-01 15:35 UTC (History)
6 users (show)

See Also:


Attachments

Description Julian Reschke 2010-04-17 10:13:02 UTC
The computation of the atom:updated timestamp for *updated* entries (see 
<http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc4287.html#rfc.section.4.2.15>) 
surprisingly depends on the presence of <ins>/<del> markup (see 
<http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/interactive-elements.html#atom>, Step 15/13).

There's nothing really *wrong* about that, but I think the specification 
needs to clarify that if you don't use <ins>/<del> (with timestamps) on 
an updated entry, the generated atom:updated will be incorrect.

Furthermore, Step 15/15:

"If publication date and update date both still have no value, then let 
them both value a value that is a valid global date and time string 
representing the global date and time of the moment that this algorithm 
was invoked."

appears to handle the case where no date information is available at 
all, letting it default to the current date. Again, generating feeds 
where atom:updated varies with every run of the algorithm seems to be a 
bad idea to me and supports the argument that producing output for 
insufficient input data is problematic.
Comment 1 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson 2010-04-18 03:14:29 UTC
Does anyone disagree that producing output for insufficient input data is problematic? You make it sound like it's controversial or something...
Comment 2 Julian Reschke 2010-04-18 09:52:40 UTC
(In reply to comment #1)
> Does anyone disagree that producing output for insufficient input data is
> problematic? You make it sound like it's controversial or something...

If it's not controversial why not state upfront that the algorithm may produce invalid data, and thus before publishing it should be verified?
Comment 3 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson 2010-08-04 20:25:43 UTC
EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document:
   http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html

Status: Rejected
Change Description: no spec change
Rationale: This section is no longer in the W3C HTML5 spec.
Comment 4 Julian Reschke 2010-08-04 21:15:23 UTC
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/links.html#atom still has the spec text, and has an issue tracker entry form pointing to *this* issue tracker.

Please fix either the spec, or the way you use the issue tracker for your spec.
Comment 5 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson 2010-08-16 21:49:34 UTC
EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document:
   http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html

Status: Rejected
Change Description: no spec change
Rationale: Invalid use of the bug tracking system.