On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 16:29:54 -0500, Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Danny Ayers wrote: > > > Which I think leaves the position that both the following would be legal: > > > > <media:thing name="here" /> > > The feedvalidator treats this as legal. > > > <item name="here" /> > > The feedvalidator treats this as illegal. Which has caught more than a > few mispellings of isPermaLink.
You can guess what's coming...how does/should the feedvalidator treat: <media:content url="http://example.org/song.mp3"; /> I can't really see where any special (semantic) relationship should be assumed for the element/attributes structure compared to the element/children structure based on the infoset. Personally I would lean towards having the feedvalidator at least warn on all those examples above to minimise confusion. Because it could easily get worse : <guid isPermaLink="true">... <media:guid isPermaLink="true">... <media:guid media:isPermaLink="true">... <film:guid media:isPermaLink="true">... <guid media:isPermaLink="true">... <link isPermaLink="true">... <link isPermaLink="possibly">... <link media:isPermaLink="true">... Which are valid? Which of the attributes share the same semantics? Cheers, Danny. -- http://dannyayers.com
