Brian Smith wrote:
There are other similar issues too. For example, some parts of various Atom
specifications use a comparison function for atom:link/@type that isn't
defined. I do the comparison the same way as we do in HTTP (case-insensitive
except for quoted values, whitespace normalized, parameter-for-parameter
comparisons). Another example is atom:link/@length which doesn't have a
normative grammar. I use "DIGIT+" as the grammar in my projects.
are these things discussed in an erratum or in some other well-know
place or document? http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=4287
does not show any atom errata, and the things you are mentioning
(undefined comparisons, missing grammars) should definitely be recorded
somewhere, shouldn't they?
cheers,
erik wilde tel:+1-510-6432253 - fax:+1-510-6425814
[email protected] - http://dret.net/netdret
UC Berkeley - School of Information (ISchool)
