I have no strong preference either way.  SHOULD would likely be enough
to express the intent while still giving folks the freedom to do other
things.

Tim Bray wrote:
> 
> On May 3, 2006, at 3:55 PM, Thomas Broyer wrote:
> 
>> I also still don't understand why the response body, if provided,
>> "must" be an Atom Entry Document:
> 
> Bah, we discussed this a *lot* and I thought it was pretty clear the WG
> had consensus for an Atom entry or nothing.  -Tim
> 
> 

Reply via email to