[uf-discuss] Hatom question
fberriman at gmail.com
Mon Sep 10 07:46:13 PDT 2007
On 10/09/2007, Frances Berriman <fberriman at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 10/09/2007, Michael Smethurst <Michael.Smethurst at bbc.co.uk> wrote:
> > Just a quick question to ask whether hatom requires an updated?
> > http://microformats.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.
More information about the microformats-discuss