Atom Thread Feed syntax

Hi everyone, I was reading the Atom Feed Thread draft [1] yesterday and I ran into a problem as I described in my blog [2]. To recap the 'in-reply-to' element defined in that specification takes an 'id' attribute that specifies /the universally unique identifier of the resource being respond

Re: Atom syndication schema

/ "Thomas Broyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to say: | RFC 3987 says (section 1.2 Applicability): |For example, XML schema [XMLSchema] has an explicit type |"anyURI" that includes IRIs and IRI references. Therefore, IRIs |and IRI references can be in attributes and elemen

Re: Atom Thread Feed syntax

2006/3/16, Sylvain Hellegouarch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Calling such an attribute 'id' is a mistake in my opinion as it confuses > with the actual ID of the element itself within the XML document it > belongs to It could lead to confusion, but as Atom doesn't define such an attribute in its own na

Re: Atom Thread Feed syntax

Hello Thomas, It could lead to confusion, but as Atom doesn't define such an attribute in its own namespace (or on elements in its own namespace) and as no other extension that I know of do that either, I don't think it really matters… You are right Atom does not define such an attribute b

Re: Atom Thread Feed syntax

2006/3/16, Sylvain Hellegouarch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > It could lead to confusion, but as Atom doesn't define such an > > attribute in its own namespace (or on elements in its own namespace) > > and as no other extension that I know of do that either, I don't think > > it really matters… > > You

Re: Atom syndication schema

David Powell wrote: Not sure if this is a known bug, but I just noticed that the RelaxNG grammar doesn't accept "atomCommonAttributes" (eg xml:lang) on the "atom:name" and "atom:uri" and "atom:email" elements used within Person constructs. Did you cc me because of my coverage of the matter? h

Re: Atom syndication schema

Thursday, March 16, 2006, 7:31:08 PM, you wrote: > David Powell wrote: >> Not sure if this is a known bug, but I just noticed that the RelaxNG >> grammar doesn't accept "atomCommonAttributes" (eg xml:lang) on the >> "atom:name" and "atom:uri" and "atom:email" elements used within >> Person const

Re: Atom Thread Feed syntax

* Thomas Broyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-03-16 20:15]: >2006/3/16, Sylvain Hellegouarch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> Atom sets the atom:id value not as in an attribute of atom:id >> but as its content. Why not following the convention in the >> first place? > >Because they don't deserve the same role.