* Graham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-05-16 01:15]: > > An "atom:entry" MUST NOT have both an "atom:content" and an > > "atom:summary" element with identical content. > > -1 > > It might solve this exact problem, but in the general case it > makes no sense.
Besides my point in the other mail, I wanted to further address this. It does make sense in the general case, in my opinion. A feed producer is expected to pick the element that reflects the payloadâs nature; this requirement would prevent them from just sticking the same payload in both elements and letting the aggregator sort it out. On a more abstract level, it says âatom:summary and atom:content are not the same thingâ in formally verifiable terms. It does not express the exact role of each element, but that is unenforcable anyway. OTOH, it forces feed producers to pick one element or the other when they only have one piece payload; and it can reasonably be assumed that theyâll pick as intended. So it seems to me that it is as close as the spec can get to enforcing correct usage of the elements. Iâm not wedded to the proposal, but after thinking about it for a while, I believe it actually makes more sense than it seems to at first blush. Regards, -- Aristotle
