Richard Salz wrote:
Going through the questions you posted earlier:
If you allow schema links at the atom:feed, does that mean
the content of all entries in the feed has to conform to that
schema?
Any content that has a schema is expected to conform to that schema. If a
client does a GET, there may be entries that are not described by a
schema; there is no requirement that every entry have a schema link. I
thought that was obvious -- do I need to make it explicit? If a client
POST's an entry that does not conform, the server may reject it. I also
thought that was obvious under section 4.4 of 5023.
Ok, so this implies that entries contained in an atom:feed do not
inherit the schema links of the parent atom:feed. That's a good thing
and should be stated explicitly.
What if the entry has a schema link that conflicts with a feed level
schema link?
This is described in the proposal: on GET, the entry-level link takes
precedence. POST is described above.
See above. As long as the atom:entry is not expected to inherit the
schema link of the atom:feed, this is not an issue.
What if there are multiple schema links that specify the same value for
the for attribute?
And same type of schema language? A very good question. My preference
would be to say that this is sytem-dependant, subject to the whims of the
validating behavior.
Works for me.
If you take an entry from an atom:feed containing a schema link and
put it into another feed, should the schema link be added to the entry
or should an atom:source element be added containing the schema link?
Is it really necessary to answer this? Can't it be left up to the server?
If the atom:entry does not inherit the schema links of the atom:feed
this becomes a non-issue.
- James
/r$
--
Visiting Member, IBM Academy
STSM, DataPower Chief Programmer
WebSphere DataPower SOA Appliances
http://www.ibm.com/software/integration/datapower/
