Hi Peter Pöml wrote: > > Am 14.12.2009 um 18:44 schrieb Hampus Wessman: >> I also think this is good and clear. Metalink Editor also currently >> strips whitespace. With this in the standard most generators will >> hopefully start generating metalinks with no extra whitespace inside >> elements. >> >> Perhaps it is simply best not to give any recommendation on how to deal >> with invalid metalinks (they are invalid, after all). Most >> implementations will probably accept some invalid metalinks anyway (e.g. >> by stripping leading and trailing whitespace). > > Thanks for the comments! I now see that the currently specified way of > dealing with whitespace is fine. >
I'm also prefer to just use the text as is, because it is more efficient(ultimately it uses less CPU cycles, so it's eco friendly;) ). Though it is more strict than Metalink v3, but we learned from the history of HTML;). By rejecting invalid documents, I hope it will eliminate bad implementation of generator. >> It would be pretty cool with a validation web site for metalinks, by the >> way. Something similar to http://validator.w3.org/. Anyone interested in >> creating something like that? I'll be interested in doing it, but I'd >> prefer to finish Metalink Editor 2.0 first (it is slowly making >> progress). > > Ah, yes, that would be quite cool indeed! > It would be good to create it in google apps engine, isn't it? I'm very much interested in GAE recently. Best regards, Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa -- 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.
