On Aug 18, 2006, at 4:32 PM, Eric J. Bowman wrote:
Thank you, Lisa. Close, but not quite -- I maintain that it is RFC
4287
which states that it is the publisher's decision whether or not to
inform a
client that an update has occurred, whereas APP maintains that all
clients
must be informed of all edits regardless.
In 4287, it is made clear that atom:updated in feeds is under the
control of the publisher of the feed, and they're going to change it
whenever they choose to change it.
Some of the discussions on APP have argued out that for an authoring
client to do synchronization, they need to get a reliable last-
modified timestamp of an entry, and there are a bunch of proposals on
the table to handle this, and I have the unenviable task of wading
through and figuring out if any of them have rough-consensus support.
However, it is clearly the case that RFC4287 and APP could end up
with different notions of last-modified. Is this a problem? -Tim
