On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 5:19 PM, Nicolas
Alvarez<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Anthony Bryan wrote:
>> o metalink:metalink elements SHOULD contain exactly one metalink:
>> origin element.
>
> SHOULD contain one always? Not only if dynamic?
yes, I think it could be useful info to have, even if not dynamic.
speaking of, what do you think of dynamic? do you think it should be
kept/removed/renamed?
> What "origin" element would be used if I create a metalink using a graphical
> tool, and then send it by email to a friend? (the .metalink itself never
> had a URI in the whole process)
yes, that's what I'm going for. we want it in there if it's published
publicly on the net. but I didn't have a good way to word it.
>> Entities such
>> as "&" and "<" represent their corresponding characters ("&"
>> and "<" respectively), not markup.
>
> Do we need to say that? Anyone not following this is violating the *XML*
> spec.
>
> It's used in Atom and/or RSS specs (don't remember which) because of the
> sheer amount of noobs who think they can parse RSS with their own
> hand-written parsers instead of using a real XML library...
it's from Atom at least. I'm feeling conservative, I don't see this
hurting if it's left in there?
--
(( Anthony Bryan ... Metalink [ http://www.metalinker.org ]
)) Easier, More Reliable, Self Healing Downloads
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
