On 4/29/05, Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> == Abstract ==
> 
> Encourage interoperability and accessibility by suggesting that key
> textual constructs be both present and non-empty.
> 

I'd prefer that a bit more of the rationale made it into the text.
Explain why we are saying SHOULD.

> 
> === section 4.1.2 ===
> 
> Add:
> 
>    atom:entry elements SHOULD contain an atom:summary element if the
> atom:content in the form of atomInlineOtherContent.

This section needs to be reworked. We can't make normative reference to the RNG.

> == Notes ==
> 
> In the event that PaceOptionalSummary is adopted, the words "is either
> not present or" would need to be added to the proposed addition to
> section 4.1.2.

-1 to this.

If PaceOptionalSummary is adopted, the summary will be a MAY, not a
SHOULD. Please put your proposals in the section marked "Proposal".

Robert Sayre

Reply via email to