Julian Reschke wrote:
Robert Sayre wrote:
Tim Bray wrote:
On Jan 30, 2005, at 12:09 PM, Robert Sayre wrote:
We should either explicitly allow application/xml in section 2, or remove this element. I'm not sure which I prefer.
atom:info is useful during transformations. Tossing atom:info will result in interoperability problems. I don't see how application/xml relates, but if I were forced to make the choice, I would drop atom:info.
I have ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA what it is that Sam and Rob are arguing about. I suspect I'm not the only one. Could someone please explain the problem in basic terms?
Thanks, Robert.
Sam wants the spec to guide the feed validator when it encounters feeds served with media types other than Atom's.
I don't want the spec to talk about HTTP or other media types.
I think it's enough to say that if it doesn't come with the right media type, it's outside the scope of the spec (same for wellformed-ness errors and so on...).
I want the spec to say what are valid media types for Atom feeds. Any other media type may work in some software combinations, but aren't guaranteed to work in any.
Sam is saying atom:info is used only when feeds are served with the wrong media type, so we shouldn't include it unless we are going to cover other media types.
I maintain that atom:info has uses when Atom feeds are served as application/atom+xml.
Interesting. Can anybody summarize what atom:info is *currently* used for?
Here is a live example of atom:info in use:
http://www.shellen.com/atom.xml
View source. View in your favorite browser.
- Sam Rubys
