James M Snell wrote:
Bob Wyman wrote:
Andreas Sewe wrote:
So, it looks like that quoting the type parameter's values is no
longer allowed;
Are the quotes part of the parameter value? Or, are quotes merely
delimiters of the value? If RFC045 is read to indicate that the
quotes are
* Andreas Sewe wrote:
This raises the question, however, whether it would be worth pointing
out in the I-D that quoting a parameter value is allowed. Implementors
might otherwise produce code that does treat
application/atom+xml;type=feed and application/atom+xml;type=feed as
different.
* Andreas Sewe wrote:
While RFC 2045 specifically allows quoted parameter values and defines
application/atom+xml;type=feed to be equivalent to
application/atom+xml;type=feed, RFC 4288 states that '[t]here is no
defined syntax for parameter values. Therefore registrations MUST
specify
While RFC 2045 specifically allows quoted parameter values and defines
application/atom+xml;type=feed to be equivalent to
application/atom+xml;type=feed, RFC 4288 states that '[t]here is no
defined syntax for parameter values. Therefore registrations MUST
specify parameter value syntax.'
On 1/19/07, Andreas Sewe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, it looks like that quoting the type parameter's values is no
longer allowed;
Are the quotes part of the parameter value? Or, are quotes merely delimiters
of the value? If RFC045 is read to indicate that the quotes are delimiters,
then it
+1. The way I read it the quotes do not matter.
- James
Bob Wyman wrote:
On 1/19/07, *Andreas Sewe* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, it looks like that quoting the type parameter's values is no
longer allowed;
Are the quotes part of the parameter value? Or, are quotes
On Thu, 11 Jan 2007 11:41:36 +0100, Andreas Sewe
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The OP has a (different) point, though: Recommending distinct file
extensions for application/atom+xml; type=entry and
application/atom+xml; type=feed is worthwhile.
If, e.g., the mime.types shipped with Apache
Sylvain Hellegouarch wrote:
Hugh Winkler wrote:
The draft makes no mention of file extensions.
Server software responsible for inserting correct Content-type header
can *possibly* set the correct value when serving a file, if the
type=entry and type=feed documents have distinct file
+1
Andreas Sewe wrote:
Sylvain Hellegouarch wrote:
Hugh Winkler wrote:
The draft makes no mention of file extensions.
Server software responsible for inserting correct Content-type header
can *possibly* set the correct value when serving a file, if the
type=entry and type=feed documents
+1
On 1/11/07, Andreas Sewe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sylvain Hellegouarch wrote:
Hugh Winkler wrote:
The draft makes no mention of file extensions.
Server software responsible for inserting correct Content-type header
can *possibly* set the correct value when serving a file, if the
The draft makes no mention of file extensions.
Atom Feed and Entry Documents can have different processing models
and there are situations where they need to be differentiated.
It would be good to enumerate some of those situations, and to examine
whether processing software depending on file
Hugh Winkler wrote:
The draft makes no mention of file extensions.
Atom Feed and Entry Documents can have different processing models
and there are situations where they need to be differentiated.
It would be good to enumerate some of those situations, and to examine
whether processing
On Thu, 04 Jan 2007 23:12:15 +0100, James M Snell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Bob Wyman wrote:
It is strongly recommended that Atom processors that do recognize the
parameter detect and report
I have no problem with the rewording. Just waiting to see what others
may have to say about
Hey Bob,
I have no problem with the rewording. Just waiting to see what others
may have to say about it.
- James
Bob Wyman wrote:
This document looks good on an initial quick read -- with one possible
exception. It says:
Atom processors that do recognize the parameter SHOULD
detect and
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories.
This draft is a work item of the Atom Publishing Format and Protocol Working
Group of the IETF.
Title : The application/atom+xml Type Parameter
Author(s) : J. Snell
Filename
This document looks good on an initial quick read -- with one possible
exception. It says:
Atom processors that do recognize the parameter SHOULD
detect and report inconsistencies between the parameter's
value and the actual type of the document's root element.
This would seem to be creating
16 matches
Mail list logo
