> <link rel="schema" href="..." for="foo" />
> <link rel="schema" href="..." for="bar" />
> <atom:content type="application/xml+something">
> <foo:blarg>...</foo:blarg>
> <bar:blarg>...</bar:blarg>
> </atom:content>
This is close, the link/@for values would actually be "for='foo:blarg'"
for example.
I went back to the RFC and re-read 4.1.3.1. It appears that you are
right, multiple top-level elements inside atom:content are not allowed.
Rats. But we still need link/@for for use at the feed level, where
individual atom:entry/atom:content elements might have different types of
content. Does that make more sense?
(Original, the schema link was intended for content in an atom:feed
document, but other discussion convinced our group that "content" belonged
in atom:content. When I made that change I didn't go back and carefully
check this. Sorry.)
/r$
--
Visiting Member, IBM Academy
STSM, DataPower Chief Programmer
WebSphere DataPower SOA Appliances
http://www.ibm.com/software/integration/datapower/
