*If* the document proceeds to Proposed Standard, the new RFC would update RFC4287 either by adding a new type param or by deprecating the use of application/atom+xml for atom entry documents in favor of a new media type. No other part of RFC4287 would be affected.
Ideally, I would much rather this be a WG draft. I pinged Tim about it the other day and he suggested that I go ahead with a I-D for now and that we can explore whether or not to move forward with it as a WG draft later. - James Mark Nottingham wrote: > What would the relationship of that document be to RFC4287? > > Cheers, > > > On 2006/12/11, at 7:32 PM, James M Snell wrote: > >> The I-D would be an individual draft, not a WG draft. > > > -- > Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/ > >
