- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 13:19:35 +0200
- 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 UTC