On 17 Jun 2005, at 6:14 pm, Tim Bray wrote:
Uh, has Mark spotted a dumb bug here that we should fix? Do we
care if *remote* content is of a composite MIME type? My feeling
was that we ruled out composite types in *local* content, for
fairly obvious reasons. The fix is obvious, in 4.1.3.1
I don't think it's a dumb bug. A composite type is more than a single
piece of content. Using atom:content this way is wrong, since
conceptually it produces this:
<atom:entry>
<atom:title>Message Subject<atom:title>
<atom:author><atom:name>An author</atom:name></atom:author>
<atom:content>
<!-- Translating the email headers to Atom -->
<atom:title>Message Subject<atom:title>
<atom:author><atom:name>An author</atom:name></atom:author>
<atom:content>Message body</atom:content>
</atom:content>
</atom:entry>
The better way to do this is to use <atom:link rel="alternate"> to
reference the messages.
-1 to the proposal, at least for this use case.
Graham
