Bill de hOra wrote: > > James M Snell wrote: > >> 1. deleted-entry is now part of the Atom namespace > > "The Atom namespace is reserved for future forward-compatible revisions > of Atom." RFC4287, 6.2. > > The rfc-editor should have picked this up. >
Picked what up? The rfc-editor is not involved in the publishing of I-D's. If this I-D is published as a Standards Track RFC, it would specifically indicate that it is an update to RFC 4287 and would qualify as a "forward-compatible revision of Atom". I believe that it's up to the Area Director to determine whether or not to allow individual submissions such as this to proceed along that route or whether a WG is required. > >> 2. a "trash" link relation is registered to point >> to trash feeds. > > Aside from what we talked about recently, the document only talks about > deletion in the past tense; there's no deletion mechanism specified. > There's no need to specify a deletion mechanism. A deleted-entry element indicates that an entry has been removed from the feed and the trash link relation points to a resource listing the entries that have been removed. The mechanism used to remove those items is orthogonal to both. - James > cheers > Bill > >
