Robert Sayre wrote:
Bill de hÃra wrote:
I guess I'm trying to get the WG to think about at this an 'document architecture' level rather than patching issues on a per case basis as we find them. But I guess people can judge for themselves whether the fact that Atom might corrupt carried content is an issue.
What should we do about the 'document architecture'? Suggestions?
I'm not sure anyone here agrees there's a 'document architecture' issue to begin with :\ That said, consistency of approach would be good, or at least articulating why consistency isn't needed in these cases would be good. Being explicit about profiling would be good if that's what we're going to do. Being sure that adding features like xml:base and xhtml:div are not more trouble than they're worth is good. Test cases would be good (thank you for yours). Here's what we don't do - fob it off to the Fabled Implementors Guide, or find out a week after we ship we made more Terrible Mistakes than we needed to.
cheers Bill
