On 4/27/05, Bob Wyman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In the absence of evidence that the proposed change will result in > damage or interoperability problems, I think the spec must change. A > security note is not sufficient.
OK, we have two errors to balance here. One of them is the text we currently have, which creates problems for republishers. The other is detailed in Sam's "Clone Wars" post: http://www.intertwingly.net/blog/2005/04/09/Clone-Wars We could go with Graham's suggestion. We could also rework the inheritance/considered-to-apply/attribution text more generally, to include atom:source more explicitly. Is there anything else we can do that would license the validator to flag the Yahoo feed in Sam's post, but give PubSub et al. a little more room to breath? Robert Sayre
