On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 1:29 AM, Tatsuhiro Tsujikawa
<[email protected]> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi,
>
> Anthony Bryan wrote:
>> I just found an error in the ID schema, where the priority attribute
>> of url/metaurl was required.
>>
>
> I fixed the same thing in 4.2.8 and 4.2.16.
argh, thought I did that. thanks!
> I just thought how clients should treat URL if priority is missing.
> If a Metalink contains URL with priority and URL without it, should
> client assume that URL without it have lowest priority or opposite?
I'd guess lowest if it wasn't important enough to put in there. what
do you think? we can save that for the client spec.
> I also found metalink:logo and metalink:origin has metalinkUri construct
> with parenthesis.
>
> metalinkOrigin =
> element metalink:origin {
> metalinkCommonAttributes,
> attribute dynamic { xsd:boolean }?,
> (metalinkUri)
> }
>
> Other elements have not parenthesis.
>
> metalinkMetaURL =
> element metalink:metaurl {
> metalinkCommonAttributes,
> attribute priority { xsd:positiveInteger {
> maxInclusive = "999999"}}?,
> attribute type { text },
> attribute name { text }?,
> metalinkUri
> }
>
> I think this is not significant for validation. But should we remove
> parenthesis?
I noticed that too. I'm not sure, but looking at Atom schema
http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4287#appendix-B
it looks like it is always in paretheses.
atomIcon = element atom:icon {
atomCommonAttributes,
(atomUri)
}
atomId = element atom:id {
atomCommonAttributes,
(atomUri)
--
(( 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.
