Aristotle Pagaltzis wrote:
> Shades of SGML.
No! No! Not that! :-)
He continues with:
> ... many good points ....
Basically, there are many really easy ways that one can handle
streams of Atom entries. You could prepend an empty feed to the head of the
stream, you could use "virtual" end-tags, you could just send entries and
rely on the receiver to wrap them up as required, etc... But, since all of
these are really easy and none of them really gets in the way of anything
rational that I can imagine someone wanting to do, why not just default to
doing it the way it is defined in the Atom spec? In that way, we don't have
to create one more context-dependent distinction between formats. Complexity
is reduced and we can avoid having to read yet-another-specification that
looks very, very much like hundreds we've read before. If Atom provides all
we need, lets not do something else unless there is a *very* good argument
to do so.
bob wyman
