On 5/4/06, Tim Bray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This assertion that atom:link is not extensible is simply, flatly, completely, wrong.
I agree that it's not an especially convincing or interesting argument, given that 6.4 starts with "Atom allows foreign markup anywhere in an Atom document" We certainly don't want consumers to barf on foreign markup anywhere, so it has to be allowed everywhere. Of course, you'd be foolish to put extension attributes on things like atom:updated, and lots of other places, because then you're going to force people to dive into the feedparser/feedtools/gdata/etc implementation layer. Secondly, we might not like it for strange pseudo-nationalistic reasons, but some implementers find it convenient to transcode Atom to RSS2. when you're doing that, it's more difficult to preserve markup in areas left undefined by the specification. If you want to make a point, and carp on how crappy those applications are, you'll look for an excuse to do it. In reality, those extension points haven't proven that interesting or necessary, and the current thread is a particularly forceful example of that reality for those of who aren't participating. So, it really is that most common of syndication archetypes: the tempest in a teacup. -- Robert Sayre
