Sam Ruby wrote:
Bill de hÓra wrote:
3. It's the kind of spec text we have rejected in the past as impletation specific and/or "best current practice" guidance:
"those that follow these suggestions will find that their feeds are useful to a wider audience than they would be otherwise."
Um, that text is not part of the proposal. It is part of the rationale.
I know. I don't see the point of considering PaceTextShouldBeProvided if the rationale doesn't hold up.
cheers Bill
