further feedback from development

17 views
Skip to first unread message

Richard Jones

unread,
Apr 26, 2013, 8:41:12 AM4/26/13
to resour...@googlegroups.com
Hi Folks,

Just a couple more minor bits of feedback arising from the development work:

- Section 3 contains almost, but not quite, everything you need to
know about the resourcesync base document format, but the introduction
of the "resourcesync" link rel isn't brought in until a later section.
Wonder if it might be worth summarising the link rels in section 3
too.

- The requirement for ordered elements indicates a direction
(ascending date order) in the change lists section, but not the change
list archives section - I'm sure it is the same, but would be good to
have an explicit statement in the spec.

Cheers,

Richard

--

Richard Jones,

Founder, Cottage Labs
t: @richard_d_jones, @cottagelabs
w: http://cottagelabs.com

Simeon Warner

unread,
May 8, 2013, 9:05:51 AM5/8/13
to resour...@googlegroups.com
On 4/26/13 8:41 AM, Richard Jones wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> Just a couple more minor bits of feedback arising from the development work:
>
> - Section 3 contains almost, but not quite, everything you need to
> know about the resourcesync base document format, but the introduction
> of the "resourcesync" link rel isn't brought in until a later section.
> Wonder if it might be worth summarising the link rels in section 3
> too.
This has been addressed in the 0.6 spec
( http://www.openarchives.org/rs/0.6/resourcesync#DocumentFormats )
> - The requirement for ordered elements indicates a direction
> (ascending date order) in the change lists section, but not the change
> list archives section - I'm sure it is the same, but would be good to
> have an explicit statement in the spec.
This is added in the 0.6 archives spec, " The pointers in a Change List
Archive must be in chronological order."
http://www.openarchives.org/rs/0.6/archives#ChangeListArch

(and also for Change Dump Archive
http://www.openarchives.org/rs/0.6/archives#ChangeDumpArch)

Thanks for pointing these out.

Cheers,
Simeon


> Cheers,
>
> Richard
>

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages