On 12/10/06, Eric Scheid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The only danger [of defining a new media type] is if someone has
implemented
APP per the moving target which is Draft-[n++] ... they should revise their test implementations as the draft updates, and certainly update once it reaches RFC status, so no sympathies there.
The impact here is not just limited to APP implementations. If a new media type is defined, it will undoubtedly appear in other contexts as well. Given the current definition of the atom syntax, it is perfectly reasonable for an "aggregator" to treat a single entry as the semantic equivelant of a single-entry feed. If a new media type is defined, such an application would end up having to be modified. That's not right... APP is not the only context within which Atom is used. bob wyman
