Re: rfc 5005 implemention/deployment?
Martin Atkins <mart@degeneration.co.uk> Thu, 23 September 2010 16:42 UTC
Return-Path: <owner-atom-syntax@mail.imc.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-atompub-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-atompub-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix)
with ESMTP id 00E993A69D6 for <ietfarch-atompub-archive@core3.amsl.com>;
Thu, 23 Sep 2010 09:42:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.046
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.046 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com
[127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3SFJlEX1b+4O for
<ietfarch-atompub-archive@core3.amsl.com>;
Thu, 23 Sep 2010 09:42:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hoffman.proper.com (Hoffman.Proper.COM [207.182.41.81]) by
core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C78C3A69D4 for
<atompub-archive@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 09:42:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hoffman.proper.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by
hoffman.proper.com (8.14.4/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o8NGbXbX075714
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
Thu, 23 Sep 2010 09:37:33 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from
owner-atom-syntax@mail.imc.org)
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hoffman.proper.com
(8.14.4/8.13.5/Submit) id o8NGbXSN075713;
Thu, 23 Sep 2010 09:37:33 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from
owner-atom-syntax@mail.imc.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: hoffman.proper.com: majordom set sender to
owner-atom-syntax@mail.imc.org using -f
Received: from mail-qy0-f171.google.com (mail-qy0-f171.google.com
[209.85.216.171]) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.4/8.14.3) with ESMTP id
o8NGbWMt075707 for <atom-syntax@imc.org>;
Thu, 23 Sep 2010 09:37:33 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from mart@degeneration.co.uk)
Received: by qyk30 with SMTP id 30so114525qyk.16 for <atom-syntax@imc.org>;
Thu, 23 Sep 2010 09:37:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.224.29.16 with SMTP id o16mr1465787qac.294.1285259852165;
Thu, 23 Sep 2010 09:37:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.64.227] (oak-out-corp.sixapart.com [204.9.180.101]) by
mx.google.com with ESMTPS id t1sm1136122qcs.9.2010.09.23.09.37.29
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 23 Sep 2010 09:37:30 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4C9B8247.7000202@degeneration.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2010 09:37:27 -0700
From: Martin Atkins <mart@degeneration.co.uk>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US;
rv:1.9.1.12) Gecko/20100915 Lightning/1.0b1 Thunderbird/3.0.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: atom-syntax@imc.org
Subject: Re: rfc 5005 implemention/deployment?
References: <4C8BB3B7.1020400@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4C8BB3B7.1020400@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-atom-syntax@mail.imc.org
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://www.imc.org/atom-syntax/mail-archive/>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:atom-syntax-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
List-ID: <atom-syntax.imc.org>
On 09/11/2010 09:52 AM, Zhiwu Xie wrote: > > Hi list, > > Wonder if you know any feed paging/archiving implementation and > deployment out there? Mark Nottingham mentioned a while ago that > Sixapart was interested but I didn't see it being used in livejournal or > alike. > TypePad uses the "next" and "previous" link relations described in section 3 as part of a broader implementation of some of the conventions specified for Google's GData protocol. This is used in TypePad's AtomPub implementation, but not in the normal feeds since they don't support pagination. Vox shares the same implementation, but of course Vox will cease to exist next week so that's not really worth considering as an example. LiveJournal has not been a Six Apart product for quite some time. However, LiveJournal's AtomPub implementation does *not* support paging, since it predates even the finalization of Atom let alone the creation of the Paging and Archiving extension.
- rfc 5005 implemention/deployment? Zhiwu Xie
- Re: rfc 5005 implemention/deployment? Mark Nottingham
- Re: rfc 5005 implemention/deployment? Martin Atkins