James, all,
I have one concern regarding the current Link Extensions ID [1]. It
currently defines attributes in the empty namespace. This causes feed
validators, e.g. [2] and [3] to complain with:
"Unexpected hash attribute on link element"
when I try to validate e.g. [4].
I suppose formally, when the Link Extensions becomes an RFC, this
updates RFC 4287 (as stated) so at that time, this should be updated
in the validators? Still, currently (and for a time after the RFC
status) it may be problematic. Since 4287 only normatively allows for
namespaced extensions I'm not sure how tools generally might handle
this (I've used Abdera in Java which copes just fine though).
Also, is there any prognosis when this might become a final RFC? (As
with tombstones, we (the swedish legal information project) need and
actively use these.)
Best regards,
Niklas Lindström
--
<http://neverspace.net/>
[1]: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-snell-atompub-link-extensions-08
[2]: http://feedvalidator.org/
[3]: http://validator.w3.org/feed/
[4]: http://rinfo.lagrummet.se/feed/current
