On Apr 9, 2005, at 4:26 PM, Graham wrote:
No one agrees with you Robert. Quit it.
Well, Robert has not actually favored us with a single clear sentence expressing his point, so I'll try:
"The requirement on accessibility grounds for a required <atom:summary> is superfluous, because we have <atom:title> and one required text field is enough."
On balance, I would still lean to encouraging the use of <summary/> because I do feel that content-ful feeds are intrinsincally better than link feeds; but only really at a +/- 0 level. That is to say, Rob's position is not that radical or unreasonable. On the other hand, I tend to agree with Sam on the subject of Rob's rhetorical techniques. At the moment, my best judgment of rough consensus would read that most people want to retain the <atom:summary> requirement, but it's clearly not the case that no one agrees with Robert. -Tim
