On Tuesday, November 16, 2004, at 08:56 AM, Lance Lavandowska wrote:
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 22:59:39 -0500, Bob Wyman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Graham wrote:I think the Pace needs to be explicit that the entry inherits from its own head rather than from the main head. There need to be rules of how to interpret it.Would wording like the following be acceptable?
"If an atom:entry contains an atom:head element then any elements or
attributes of the atom:entry which are defined as being inherited from the
atom:head of the parent feed MUST be inherited only from the atom:head
element contained by the atom:entry."
Huh? is my first reaction. Here is an off-the-cuff attempt at rewording it. Perhaps some jumble of the two will be more clear?
"Elements or attributes of atom:entry which are defined as being inherited from atom:head MUST inherit from the atom:head of the atom:entry, if present. If atom:head is not present in atom:entry then inheritance descends from the atom:head of the parent feed."
What about if we stated things more broadly, along the lines of:
"An atom:entry element which contains an atom:head element MUST be processed as if its containing atom:feed element contained an atom:head element with the same contents."
