On Sat, Apr 02, 2005 at 09:22:49PM -0500, Sam Ruby wrote: > I've run a feedvalidator for years. Every version of RSS has required > this link. I've *never* heard anybody complain about this in the > context of any version of RSS. It puzzles the bejeebers out of me why > this issue is only brought up in the context of Atom.
Speaking personally, I would never have complained about it in the context of RSS because RSS is such a fragmented mess. It comes up in the context of Atom because Atom is trying to be unambiguous and helpful. If MUST is vastly preferable for user agent implementors, then IMHO there should at least be an explanation of what to do when you can't generate an alternate repr (for instance: you may not have enough resource to build an alternate version when you know that alternate version won't be used). Given that the spec currently deliberately backs off on implementation usage (and rightly so), but marks round tripping as a SHOULD (but puts these in different sections with no cross-linking), I feel that a tiny bit (not sarcastic - literally a tiny bit) more guidance for feed producers would be helpful. James -- /--------------------------------------------------------------------------\ James Aylett xapian.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] uncertaintydivision.org
