Anne van Kesteren wrote:


* 3.1.1 "type" Attribute

I was wondering how I can include MathML in Atom posts or simple SVG
fragments. If there are extension mechanisms available, shouldn't 3.1.1
refer to those?


You can put it in atom:content. Other core elements are there to provide a *baseline*.


* 3.5.1 "rel" Attribute

Why are the only values defined "alternate" and "related"? I have
implemented "via" for a long time on my personal weblog and some
aggregators have even implemented support for it. I consider it to be
quite useful.


Write a Pace. I would support it.


* 3.5.2 "type" Attribute

It is a bit vague that this TYPE attribute differs from the one in
section 3.1.1. Where this one MUST have a MIME type as value the other
MUST NOT.


This is incorrect.



* 3.5.4 "hreflang" Attribute

What I do not understand is that Atom provides a mechanism for linking
to translations of the entry but does not provide a mechanism to include
the actual translation. (For example, by allowing only a single TITLE
element instead of allowing multiple if the value of the xml:lang
attribute is different.)


People are not born with Atom documents in their hands. We don't need to provide for every eventuality.



* 4.1 "version" Attribute

Does this attribute imply the feed has to be downloaded first before the
aggregator knows if it supports the Atom format used? Can this not be
solved by a MIME type parameter or is that going to difficult to implement?



I think "version" should be dropped. We can always add it later.


* 4.2.2 "atom:link" Element

It does not make sense to only allow a single "alternate" link construct
if the TYPE attribute has the same value. What if I have translations of
the document in question? For example:

# <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" hreflang="nl" href="/nl/"/>
# <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" hreflang="ja" href="/ja/"/>


I agree. I think we should allow one or more.




* 5.4 "atom:edit" Element

Why does the specification not define that this MUST be a URI and how
this URI MUST be processed as is done in for example 3.5.3?


It does. See "Service Construct".



* 5.8 "atom:id" Element

What type of content does this element contain? A URI, a string? How
should it be created? How can I make sure, as a publisher that my
atom:id value is universally unique and always will be?


See "Identity Construct".



* 5.12.1 "type" attribute

This makes the TYPE attribute suck even more, IMHO. Can the Atom WG not
introduce a second attribute? I believe we had MODE and TYPE some time ago.



Co-constraints suck. @mode would be a multiplier on the ones we already have.




* 5.12.2 "src" attribute

How about fallback content? What is meant with "should be local"? For
example, what do I do if I want to include a large SVG graphic in my
feed which has the MIME type "image/svg+xml". Should I include it into
the feed?


You have lots of options that don't require "fallback content". We rejected xhtml:object a long time ago.

Robert Sayre



Reply via email to