Nicolas Alvarez skrev:
> Anthony Bryan wrote:
>
>> o metalink:metalink elements SHOULD contain exactly one metalink:
>> origin element.
>>
>
> SHOULD contain one always? Not only if dynamic?
>
> 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)
>
>
Good point. In some cases it doesn't make sense or at least it is
hard/impossible to come up with a valid one.
>> 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...
>
I agree here too. Not that it actually hurts, but it isn't necessary...
Here's the corresponding section in the xml spec, by the way:
http://www.w3.org/TR/xml/#syntax (section 2.4)
There may be a lot of noobs trying to parse metalinks too, though =)
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
