PaceMediaEntries4 includes the following text (which could very likely use an editorial scrub but at least it gets the intention across):
Implementors should note that, per the requirements of [RFC4287], media link entries MUST contain an atom:summary element. Upon successful creation of a media link entry, a server MAY choose to populate the atom:summary element (as well as other required elements such as atom:id, atom:author and atom:title) with content derived from the POSTed media resource or from any other source. A server may or may not allow a client to modify the server selected values for these elements. Our implementation allows clients to optionally use Content-Description. to provide the description of the media content. - James Thomas Broyer wrote: > > 2006/5/3, Robert Sayre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> On 5/3/06, Thomas Broyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > >> > 2006/5/2, Robert Sayre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> > > [atom entry w/ no text] >> > > >> > >> > The current draft doesn't help, neither does your "basic" proposal. >> >> <http://franklinmint.fm/2006/01/24/draft-sayre-atompub-protocol-basic-06.html#rfc.section.8.2> >> > > "Clients may include a 'Content-Description' header [RFC2045] > providing a more complete description of the content." > > How is that helping servers if the client doesn't include a > Content-Description? > > And, as I said, PaceMediaEntriesN don't aim at solving this problem > (if one thinks this is a problem). Write a Pace if you think > Content-Description should be included into the spec, I'd probably be > +1. > > -- > Thomas Broyer > >
