On 27/4/06 1:28 AM, "James M Snell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There's no reason why one couldn't stuff an intospection document into > the content of an entry. There's also no reason why the collection > element cannot appear as an extension element on the entry (which we do > in our implementation for entries that represent collections). what's important is we sort out what might become the convention (or spec), so your tool can create collections on my server and vice versa. it's late, so I'm a bit fuzzy ... 1) an extension element on the entry would be something that extends the attributes or qualities of the *content* for which that entry exists for, right? So what would be the atom:content for that entry which represents a collection (or category, or author)? 2) if instead we go with atom:content holding the introspection bits, do we then run into the problem of "it's not a complete document" thing again? e.
