After writing my last email I thought of something else that could be done instead of pub:control. This might have been suggested already or it might just be not a best practice by the XML community.
What if we were to create a pub:control attribute instead of an element that extension elements can use to define where they want to be placed. An element which does not identify itself as a pub:control extension would have to be ignored by the server and let it pass through. The APP would only pay attention to those elements marked as controls. Forgive me for the stupid names, but maybe a simple pub:control="yes" would do. Our blog extension could define a blog:control element where everything relating to blogs would be contained or elements could simply be used independently with different pub:control attribute combinations. <atom:entry xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom";> <atom:title>Mars Attacks!</atom:title> ... <blog:enable pub:control="public"> <blog:feature id="http://purl.org/atompub/blogcontrols/1.0#comments-moderated"; until="2005-12-12T00:00:00Z" /> <blog:feature id="http://purl.org/atompub/blogcontrols/1.0#comments-remote"; until="2005-12-12T00:00:00Z" /> </blog:enable> <blog:scheduled pub:control="app-only">2005-11-11T00:00:00Z</blog:scheduled> </atom:entry> Regards, Elias
