Julian Reschke wrote:
Sam Ruby wrote:
That's what I want to change. I've updated the Pace to make this clearer. I replaced the abstract completely, and added one sentence to the proposal.
New abstract:
Given that common practice is to include this element, making it mandatory makes things clearer to both people who are producing consuming tools based on the spec, and people who are producing new feeds based on copy and paste.
New spec text:
The xhtml:div element itself MUST NOT be considered part of the content.
I find it a bit problematic to use "common practice" in Atom feeds as justification for spec changes. Let's make the spec as clear and simple as possible. If this is in conflict with common usage in experimental Atom feeds, so be it.
That is consistent with your prior statement that you don't believe that implementation issues should affect the format:
http://www.imc.org/atom-syntax/mail-archive/msg12699.html
Yes, I want a spec that is simple. I also want a spec that average people can implement simply and correctly.
We have seen on this very mailing list people who have an above average understanding of XML trip over this particular area numerous times.
I am not content to create a format for which the answers to such common user errors is "so be it".
- Sam Ruby
