> Ian Davis wrote: > > Graham wrote: > > That to me is demonstrates a very clear intention of the working group > > that the content must be exactly equal to the IRI. Changing this to > > allow whitespace would represent a major technical change to the > > format. I will figuratively lie down in the road if anyone suggests > > whitespace should be allowed around any machine-read content (uris, > > @type, @rel, etc). > > Leading and trailing whitespace should be stripped from the content of > an atom:id element. > > The two examples that Bill gave WILL happen in the wild and Atom > consumers will just deal with it by stripping the whitespace anyway > despite what the spec says now. I think this should be endorsed in the > spec for interoperability.
+1. But Sam Ruby's first draft at [1] demostrated more than just atom:id. (He changed it now so that the examples don't have white space showing! lol!) They also included things like: <id> http://example.com/ </id> <updated> 2003-12-13T18:30:02Z </updated> Neither of those are strictly legal, since white space is illegal in both IRI and RFC 3339 (dates) I think. However they are legal with the Relax NG grammer used. I think that it also be should be noted for atom:person/* constructs (except for atom:name) and atom:date constructs that white space is illegal. Or that for them and atomURI constructs that leading and trailing whitespace is legal but should be stripped away. I'm not sure which is best. Then there is atom:person/atom:name constructs. Should leading and trailing whiespace be stripped or should it be considered significant? Certainly it is significant and legal in the middle of a person's name. [1] http://www.atomenabled.org/developers/syndication/ -- Jimmy Cerra https://nemo.dev.java.net __________________________________ Yahoo! Mail for Mobile Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail
