Robert Sayre wrote:
Point taken. How about 'atom:head elements MUST contain at least one atom:link element with a relation of "alternate".'
Can't we just get rid of the defaulting? That would make the spec simpler with little additional verbosity in the instance documents.
In this case, my preference would be for the spec to define the inevitable, but the WG should decide. If the WG decides to leave attribute defaulting, would the text above be sufficient?
Yep.
I couldn't find any standards track documents that reference them. I guess we could link it up in the HTML document, but note that the W3C docs are linked either.
For instance <http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml2/references.html#ref_RELAXNG> and <http://greenbytes.de/tech/webdav/rfc3470.html#RELAX-NG>.
LOL. It's probably OK if that one does it. But... the first document is a W3C spec. The second is a BCP, not a standards track document. We'll probably be told what to do anyway.
True. I'd prefer us to try to get the URL in (with the risk to be told to take it out) rather non trying at all.
Best regards, Julian
-- <green/>bytes GmbH -- http://www.greenbytes.de -- tel:+492512807760
