Re: Questions about -04

[Bill de hÓra]

Robert Sayre wrote:
Norman Walsh wrote:
>
2. Why MUST a feed point to an alternate version. What if the feed is all
  I publish?
 
I don't know. I say we drop it.
+1.

3. 4.2.2 says
  atom:head elements MUST NOT contain more than one atom:link element
  with a rel attribute value of "alternate" that has the same type
  attribute value.
  What if the atom:link elments have different hreflang values?
  
Or, for that matter, different titles and URIs. I think we should drop 
the restriction.
I'm not sure dropping the restriction fixes anything. I think your 
concerns indicate a latent problem with the link construct (no news 
there I guess); Methinks @rel is co-occurent and meta-markup at the same 
time, ie the value in @rel seems to want to scope over and constrain the 
possible other attribute values in its atom:link - and in  other sibling 
atom:link elements for that matter.   I say wait a bit before deciding.


5. 7.1 says
  Processing [W3C.REC-xmldsig-core-20020212].  Other XML signature
  mechanisms MUST NOT be used on the document element of an Atom
  document.
  Are we sure we want to prohibit them?
 

I think we should drop that sentence.
+1.
cheers
Bill