Robert Sayre wrote:
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.
Suggestions? Is this something that the editor can handle?
=== 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.
Suggestions? Is this something that the editor can handle?
== 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".
At the moment, the proposal is based on the existing draft-ietf-atompub-format-08.
PaceOptionalSummary does not introduce a MAY, it removes a crucial MUST -- one that, if removed, would exasperate the problem that PaceTextShouldBeProvided is intended to address.
- Sam Ruby
