Tim Bray wrote:
On Apr 3, 2005, at 12:45 PM, Graham wrote:
So do you have an argument here as to why it should be required? All I'm seeing is that it's easy to workaround when the publisher omits it.
Agreed. Joe, that wasn't very convincing. I repeat, we've seen several very believable use-cases for why someone might want this, and no good arguments (that I can remember) that it would break anything. Sam has pointed out that no previous version of RSS has done this, which is a reasonable argument; except for we have use-cases, and nobody's shown that the cost is non-zero. -Tim
The top level feed stuff doesn't make a lot of sense to me. That @alternate is mandatory while @self and atom:id are not isn't very convincing either:
atom:[EMAIL PROTECTED]'alternate'] : MUST
atom:[EMAIL PROTECTED]'self'] : SHOULD
atom:id : MAY You can't have a useful discussion about @alternate without talking about @self or atom:id.
Thus: I'm -1 to downgrading @alternate unless @self is lifted to MUST or atom:id is lifted to MUST. If either are lifted to must I'm 0 on downgrading @alternate. At that stage @alternate doesn't matter a whole lot.
cheers Bill
