Hatom question

Just a quick question to ask whether hatom requires an
updated?

http://micr
oformats.org/wiki/hatom#Schema

says it is

http
://microformats.org/wiki/hatom#Entry_Updated

Says it's a should and parsers will fall back to published
date

?!?


http://www.bbc.co.uk/
This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may
contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC
unless specifically stated.
If you have received it in error, please delete it from your
system.
Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor
act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately.
Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received.
Further communication will signify your consent to this.
					
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

On 10/09/2007, Michael Smethurst <Michael.Smethurstbbc.co.uk> wrote:
> Just a quick question to ask whether hatom requires an
updated?
>
> http://micr
oformats.org/wiki/hatom#Schema
>
> says it is
>
> http
://microformats.org/wiki/hatom#Entry_Updated
>
> Says it's a should and parsers will fall back to
published date
>

Yeah, that's right.  I've found that many people tend to
just use
published though (myself included), and forego ever using
updated.

What're you having problems with?

-- 
Frances Berriman
http://fberriman.com
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

On 10/09/2007, Frances Berriman <fberrimangmail.com> wrote:
> On 10/09/2007, Michael Smethurst
<Michael.Smethurstbbc.co.uk> wrote:
> > Just a quick question to ask whether hatom
requires an updated?
> >
> > http://micr
oformats.org/wiki/hatom#Schema
> >
> > says it is
> >
> > http
://microformats.org/wiki/hatom#Entry_Updated
> >
> > Says it's a should and parsers will fall back to
published date
> >
>
> Yeah, that's right.  I've found that many people tend
to just use
> published though (myself included), and forego ever
using updated.
>
> What're you having problems with?


Apologies for the reply to myself, but I just spotted what
you mean...
the schema refers to published as a MUST and the specific
information
as a SHOULD, yeah?

I'd treat updated as a SHOULD.  It's the date in general
(published or
updated) that should be described as the MUST, as far as I'm
aware.


-- 
Frances Berriman
http://fberriman.com
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

On 9/10/07, David Janes <davidjanesblogmatrix.com> wrote:

> As Frances mentions, most people just use
"updated", but if your
> underlying CMS knows the difference between the publish
date and the
> updated date and you want to expose this information,
you'd be best to
> use both.

Whoops, Frances said "published". The main thing
is _one_ of them is
required: use the semantically correct thing for the data
you have.

-- 
David Janes
Founder, BlogMatrix
http://www.blogmatrix.com
http://blogmatrix.bl
ogmatrix.com
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

On 9/10/07, Frances Berriman <fberrimangmail.com> wrote:
> On 10/09/2007, Frances Berriman <fberrimangmail.com> wrote:
> > On 10/09/2007, Michael Smethurst
<Michael.Smethurstbbc.co.uk> wrote:
> > > Just a quick question to ask whether hatom
requires an updated?
> > >
> > > http://micr
oformats.org/wiki/hatom#Schema
> > >
> > > says it is
> > >
> > > http
://microformats.org/wiki/hatom#Entry_Updated
> > >
> > > Says it's a should and parsers will fall back
to published date
> > >
> >
> > Yeah, that's right.  I've found that many people
tend to just use
> > published though (myself included), and forego
ever using updated.
> >
> > What're you having problems with?
>
>
> Apologies for the reply to myself, but I just spotted
what you mean...
> the schema refers to published as a MUST and the
specific information
> as a SHOULD, yeah?
>
> I'd treat updated as a SHOULD.  It's the date in
general (published or
> updated) that should be described as the MUST, as far
as I'm aware.

You MUST have either on an entry one of:

- "updated"
- "updated" and "published"
- or "published" (which implies an updated value)

As Frances mentions, most people just use
"updated", but if your
underlying CMS knows the difference between the publish date
and the
updated date and you want to expose this information, you'd
be best to
use both.

The peculiarities, such as they are, in this rule come from
the
intersection of the MUST requirements in Atom and the real
world
examples we found.

Regards, etc...


-- 
David Janes
Founder, BlogMatrix
http://www.blogmatrix.com
http://blogmatrix.bl
ogmatrix.com
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

On 10/09/2007, David Janes <davidjanesblogmatrix.com> wrote:
> On 9/10/07, David Janes <davidjanesblogmatrix.com> wrote:
>
> > As Frances mentions, most people just use
"updated", but if your
> > underlying CMS knows the difference between the
publish date and the
> > updated date and you want to expose this
information, you'd be best to
> > use both.
>
> Whoops, Frances said "published". The main
thing is _one_ of them is

Aye - it's that slip of the tongue which seems all too
common when
discussing posting dates that causes the confusion, in my
opinion.
Published and updated tend to be rather interchangeable
terms for
authors.

As for the inconsistency - I'm not sure to be honest.  I
assume it's
an over-sight on the contributors part.  If no one has any
clear
reason why it should say one thing in one place, and another
somewhere
else, then I'd advise it to be clarified to match our
conversation
here.

-- 
Frances Berriman
http://fberriman.com
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

On 10/09/2007, David Janes <davidjanesblogmatrix.com> wrote:
> On 9/10/07, Frances Berriman <fberrimangmail.com> wrote:
> > Aye - it's that slip of the tongue which seems all
too common when
> > discussing posting dates that causes the
confusion, in my opinion.
> > Published and updated tend to be rather
interchangeable terms for
> > authors.
> >
> > As for the inconsistency - I'm not sure to be
honest.  I assume it's
> > an over-sight on the contributors part.  If no one
has any clear
> > reason why it should say one thing in one place,
and another somewhere
> > else, then I'd advise it to be clarified to match
our conversation
> > here.
>
> I'm not sure what you're saying about the honest part.
>
> Atom entries MUST have "updated" [1]. Many
blogging tools (blogger,
> for example) only provide "published" and
most templates we have seen
> only use "published". Thus this is the way we
get the hAtom rules.
>
> If there's an inconsistency in the hAtom spec, please
point it out and
> I'll work on correcting it.
>
> Regards, etc...
>
> [1] http://www.atomenabled.org/developers/sy
ndication/#requiredEntryElements
>

There is... reffering back to Michaels original post..

http://micr
oformats.org/wiki/hatom#Schema says "updated.
required
using datetime-design-pattern."

whereas http
://microformats.org/wiki/hatom#Entry_Updated says
"an
Entry SHOULD have an Entry Updated element"

The first suggests a must and the second a should.  It's
just a bit
confusing, so any help to iron that out would be fabulous.


-- 
Frances Berriman
http://fberriman.com
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

> There is... reffering back to Michaels original post..
>
> http://micr
oformats.org/wiki/hatom#Schema says "updated.
required
> using datetime-design-pattern."
>
> whereas http
://microformats.org/wiki/hatom#Entry_Updated says
"an
> Entry SHOULD have an Entry Updated element"
>
> The first suggests a must and the second a should. 
It's just a bit
> confusing, so any help to iron that out would be
fabulous. 

See the last line of that section [1]; I think this will
resolve the
issue for you.

Regards, etc...

[1] http://micr
oformats.org/wiki/hatom#Schema
-- 
David Janes
Founder, BlogMatrix
http://www.blogmatrix.com
http://blogmatrix.bl
ogmatrix.com
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

On Sep 10, 2007, at 10:39 AM, David Janes wrote:

>> The first suggests a must and the second a should. 
It's just a bit
>> confusing, so any help to iron that out would be
fabulous. 
>
> See the last line of that section [1]; I think this
will resolve the
> issue for you.

As at least two people missed that, it may be worthwhile to
make it  
more obvious.  I think hCard does this a little more
clearly, with an  
asterisk after each required-but-implied element, and then
an element- 
specific note:

http
://microformats.org/wiki/hcard#Property_List

Peace,
Scott

_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss

> There is... reffering back to Michaels original post..

> http://micr
oformats.org/wiki/hatom#Schema says "updated.
required
> using datetime-design-pattern."

> whereas http
://microformats.org/wiki/hatom#Entry_Updated says
"an
> Entry SHOULD have an Entry Updated element"

> The first suggests a must and the second a should. 
It's just a bit
> confusing, so any help to iron that out would be
fabulous. 

In Atom, atom:updated is required, and atom:published is
optional.

I think that hAtom has the same rule as Atom. The catch is,
when updated
is missing but published is supplied, hAtom says that the
updated value
is implicitly the same as the published value. So hAtom
still has the
"MUST have updated" rule.


-- 
Edward O'Connor
hober0gmail.com

Ense petit placidam sub libertate quietem.

_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discussmicroformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microforma
ts-discuss