per rfc4287 section 4.1.3.3
4. If the value of "type" is an XML media type [RFC3023] or ends
with "+xml" or "/xml" (case insensitive), the content of
atom:content MAY include child elements and SHOULD be suitable
for handling as the indicated media type. If the "src" at
Is this a valid atom entry?
[...elided...]
a snippet of foo xml
http://xmlns.com/foo/0.1/";>
King George
That is, is a partial xml document valid inside the atom:content element?
What about xml formats whose spe
Eric Scheid wrote:
Is this a valid atom entry?
[...elided...]
a snippet of foo xml
http://xmlns.com/foo/0.1/";>
King George
I'm not sure if I misunderstood your question, or the mismatched tags are a
typo, but that's
Eric Scheid wrote:
Is this a valid atom entry?
[...elided...]
a snippet of foo xml
http://xmlns.com/foo/0.1/";>
King George
No. It's not even well-formed much less valid.
--
Elliotte Rusty Harold [EMAIL
Elliotte Harold wrote:
No. It's not even well-formed much less valid.
I personally assumed that the was an unintended error..
after accounting for such, the example is valid.
- James
On 16/1/06 12:40 PM, "Elliotte Harold" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No. It's not even well-formed much less valid.
ignore the typo.
e.
On 16/1/06 1:07 PM, "James M Snell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I personally assumed that the was an unintended error..
> after accounting for such, the example is valid.
Yes, that was a typo.
But I'm not so sure it's valid now, because of the SHOULD clause below:
per rfc4287 section 4.1
Eric Scheid wrote:
But I'm not so sure it's valid now, because of the SHOULD clause below:
per rfc4287 section 4.1.3.3
[snip]
Assume foo xml requires foo:basket as the root element. Is it valid to have
atom:content with foo:thing as the immediate child?
Hey, now you're changing the s
Eric Scheid wrote:
But I'm not so sure it's valid now, because of the SHOULD clause below:
I suppose technically it is valid since a SHOULD is a recommendation not a
requirement, but you'd need a very good reason for not following that
recommendation.
For example, an OPML document require
On 16/1/06 1:57 PM, "James M Snell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> Heh.. another typo methinks ;-)
grrr! TooEarly - SufficientCoffee = Typos
e.
On 16/1/06 2:09 PM, "James Holderness" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The one time I'd think it might be safe is with XHTML (as I mentioned in a
> previous message) since Atom processors are already required to handle XHTML
> fragments in the content element. Anything else would be highly risky unl
Hi Eric,
* Eric Scheid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-01-16 05:20]:
>then you're not going to like what I was thinking of doing ...
>posting chunks to an APP/media collection,
>such that the media collection entry might look like this (no
>typos this time, I hope)...
>
>
>...
>
>
>
On 16/1/06 3:46 PM, "A. Pagaltzis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Thus, in the same sense I might have elsewhere a collection of
>> images, I have here a collection of atom categories.
>
> That doesn¹t even work, because this is invalid:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
On 16 Jan 2006, at 3:09 am, James Holderness wrote:
The one time I'd think it might be safe is with XHTML (as I
mentioned in a previous message) since Atom processors are already
required to handle XHTML fragments in the content element. Anything
else would be highly risky unless it was a
Hi Eric,
* Eric Scheid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-01-16 05:20]:
>then you're not going to like what I was thinking of doing ...
>posting chunks to an APP/media collection,
>such that the media collection entry might look like this (no
>typos this time, I hope)...
>
>
>...
>
>
>
On 16 Jan 2006, at 6:50 am, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
okay, another thrust, taking into account the things you said in
your reply to the first thrust: is anything wrong with this?
This is valid Atom.
Two options:
1) Valid but completely meaningles
I aggree to this point
-Manoj
On Mon, 16 Jan 2006 11:59:48 +0530, Graham Parks
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 16 Jan 2006, at 3:09 am, James Holderness wrote:
The one time I'd think it might be safe is with XHTML (as I mentioned
in a previous message) since Atom processors are already r
17 matches
Mail list logo
