I just read the current draft and I must say that it's really good!! 
It's very clear and I like the new standard too. It shows that the 
metalink format has been around for some time. Lots of improvements!

Just a few comments on small things:

Somewhere it says:
  metalink:metalink elements MAY contain exactly one metalink:origin
  element.  If metalink:type is "dynamic", metalink:metalink
  elements MAY contain exactly one metalink:origin element.
Looks like an unnecessary repetition. The same for metalink:updated a 
few lines down.

metalink:resources element MUST contain at least one metalink:url 
element, but couldn't it be useful with a metalink that only contains 
metalink:metadata tags (and no urls)?

Great work!
Hampus Wessman


Anthony Bryan wrote:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-bryan-metalink-04.txt
>
> A new version of I-D, draft-bryan-metalink-04.txt has been successfuly
> submitted by Anthony Bryan and posted to the IETF repository.
>
> Filename:        draft-bryan-metalink
> Revision:        04
> Title:           The Metalink Download Description Format
> Creation_date:   2008-12-31
> WG ID:           Independent Submission
> Number_of_pages: 36
>
> Abstract:
> This document specifies Metalink Documents, an XML-based download
> description format.
>
>   


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Metalink Discussion" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/metalink-discussion?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to