On 28/1/05 4:03 AM, "Bob Wyman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Also, why limit this to feed/head, and not entry? So that Atom >> feeds will be easily convertible to RSS 2.0? > > Converting *to* RSS 2.0 shouldn't be a goal or even a consideration > in any Atom related discussions. Only conversion *from* RSS 2.0 is > interesting. > > If Atom is guaranteed to be convertible both to and from RSS 2.0 > then Atom can never be more than RSS 2.0 and a great deal of the effort and > goodwill that has gone into Atom would be a complete waste of time. but we shouldn't get spiteful about it. If it doesn't matter either way on some point, why not allow compatibility? I'm saying it should be a consideration and possibly even an assumption, but remembering that if there is a good reason to go another route (and break compatibility) then that trumps the case. Lets not be incompatible for incompatibilities sake.! e.
