Martin Duerst wrote:
Of course I'm also for making an alternate link for a feed a MAY rather than a MUST.
I'm in favor of keeping it a MUST, but I could live with it becoming a SHOULD. As Sam says, all versions of RSS have made it a requirement. Feeds without a link will probably break some clients, so you better know what you're doing. OTOH, there have been some persuasive arguments for making it optional.
If we change it, SHOULD seems like the right way to go: "the distinction between 'SHOULD' and 'MUST' in RFC2119 doesn't apply to stupid implementors."[0] :)
Robert Sayre
[0] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/2005JanMar/0088.html
