I agree with James suggestion for 10.1
Add to 10.1: An atom:entry MUST contain no more than one "edit" link relation. As for 10.2 I think we need to spell things out a little more explicitly. If there are mulitple links we need to say what the requirements are for having multiple links, how to choose among those links, and give guidance on how the underlying resource should behave. Add to 10.2: An atom:entry MAY contain zero or more "edit-media" link relations and each atom:entry MUST NOT contain more than one atom:link element with a rel attribute value of "edit-media" that has the same combination of type and hreflang attribute values. All "edit-media" link relations in the same entry reference the same resource. If a client encounters multiple "edit-media" link relations in an entry then it should choose a link based on the client preferences for type and hreflang. If a client encounters multiple "edit-media" link relations in an entry and has no preference based on the type and hreflang attributes then the client SHOULD pick the first "edit-media" link relation in document order. On 6/12/06, Tim Bray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jun 12, 2006, at 7:19 AM, Joe Gregorio wrote: > Yeah, that's a good catch, PaceMediaEntries5 is silent on the > cardinality > of 'edit-media' links and that needs to be fixed. I really don't > care if we > say there can be at most one or if we allow more than one, but > PaceMediaEntries5 > does need to be clarified on that point. How about a suggested amendment from our esteemed co-editor Mr. Gregorio? -Tim
-- Joe Gregorio http://bitworking.org
