Thomas Broyer wrote:
With or without talking about xml:lang, the Pace does not say how many
app:title you could have in an app:workspace or app:collection
element: zero or one? exactly one? zero, one or many? at least one?
The spec text is not precise enough, and the RelaxNG schema is not
updated to help readers understand...
"The app:workspace element MUST contain an "app:title" element, "
What you like to see instead? If you don't know or won't say, I can
write something else and see if you like it, but I'm not going to play
fetch me a pace beyond that.
> Plus, Atom (RFC4287) does not allow multiple atom:title, atom:summary,
> atom:content or any other language sensitive construct.
I see your point, but it's not an RFC4287 document. The app:title elem
is in the http://purl.org/atom/app# namespace.
Yep, but there's still an Atom in it, be it Atom Syndication Format or
Atom Publishing Protocol ;-)
No matter, it's not an RFC4287 document. I'm not saying that's right,
only that there is no Atom format in it and are 2 different title elements.
I'd expect some homogeneity…
There's no more or less homogeneity introduced by making the attribute
an element.
As a reader not having participating in their elaboration, I would
find it /bizarre/ if a common WG (AtomPub) used two different
approaches when designing their XML formats…
But you can't possibly /know/ that.
July 5th is International Conterfactuals Day :)
cheers
Bill
