Hi Daniel, > I am curious about the status of the required <div> container when > including xhtml in text constructs. Wi[ll] it be changed to become > optional instead?
There's no ongoing effort to revise the Atom syntax format, so assume this <div> will be required in the forseeable future. > Instead I am currently using a ‘hack’ which involves declaring the > type as application/xhtml+xml instead of xhtml. Note that Atom's special-cased @type="html" and @type="xhtml" are explicitly for HTML *fragments*; if you use @type="application/xhtml+xml", it's reasonable for an Atom processor to expect *an entire XHTML document*, <html> element and all, inside your text construct. > Is there a better way of doing this? [...] My main concern is that > some feed readers may not be able to support my undocumented > implementation/interpretation. It's probably not a bad idea to use the HTML namespace as the default within your text construct, like so: <summary type="xhtml"> <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml";> <p> This is a <em>summary</em> paragraph. </p> </div> </summary> -- Edward O'Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ense petit placidam sub libertate quietem.
