> Schema > links within the atom:feed can be used to identify the schema(s) of the > types of top-level elements that should appear within the feed. Those > are two separate cases, neither of which requires the invention of the > for attribute.
Yes, since atom:content can only have a single child element, then the @for is superfluous. But I don't understand how to meet the feed issue without the @for -- can you show me how? Let's say I have a feed that accepts tns:esb entries and snl:foobar entries. > This is fine but if you go down this route, there are many issues that > need to be dealt with. It's not clear to me that every single semantic needs to be completely nailed down (viz, http://www.dehora.net/journal/2009/02/03/just-use-post/). Looking at RFC 5005, what if a feed contains multiple conflicting archive links? I'll meet the requirements, I just don't want to be a special case :) /r$ -- Visiting Member, IBM Academy STSM, DataPower Chief Programmer WebSphere DataPower SOA Appliances http://www.ibm.com/software/integration/datapower/
