Can you add PaceAlternateLinkWeakening. It was discussed but I never put it on
the wiki.
Henry
On 5 May 2005, at 13:17, Sam Ruby wrote:
*************************** REMINDER ****************************** ** Use more specific subject lines when responding to this note! ** *************************** REMINDER ******************************
First the meat... here's the new atom pub issues list, conveniently sorted into categories:
EntryId: http://intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceAllowDuplicateIDs http://intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceDuplicateIDWithSource2 http://intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceDuplicateIDWithSource http://intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceExplainDuplicateIds
FeedId: http://intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceFeedIdOrAlternate http://intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceFeedIdOrSelf http://intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceOptionalFeedLink
Provenance: http://intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceOriginalAttribute http://intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceSourceRecs
Status: http://intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceEntryState http://intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PacePubControl http://intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PacePubStatusResource
Text: http://intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceBriefExample http://intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceCoConstraintsAreBad http://intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceOptionalSummary http://intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceRecommendPlainTextContent http://intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceTextShouldBeProvided
Recommended for Closure: http://intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceXhtmlDivSuggestedOnly http://intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceXmlContentWrapper
Now for some administrivia. No progress was made on the last published issued list[1], so I've gone ahead and marked those issues that were recommended for closure, closed; and those currently under discussion were moved back to Needing to Revisit.
Next, I'd like to remind everybody that last call for the Atom Format went out. Operationally, what this means is that the secretary and co-chairs are going to be increasingly reluctant to revisit things simply because somebody wants to bring them up again. What that means is that in order to successfully bring up an issue, you need to do a little homework. Demonstrate that you have revisited the previous discussion, and that you either have something new to add, or can point out some evidence that the previous consensus call was made in error.
Tim has taken the opportunity to lead by example on this one with PaceAllowDuplicateIDs. The secretary and co-chairs all are in agreement that the XhtmlDiv related paces don't meet this criteria. If anyone disagrees, what we would like to ask is that you follow Tim's lead.
Because we are in last call, I've scheduled everything related to the Format document. As one of the status paces touches on the format, I've scheduled all three. All we need to resolve now is the extent to which this is going to affect the format document.
I believe that PaceBriefExample is truly editorial, meaning that the editors can act on this at their discretion.
- Sam Ruby
[1] http://www.imc.org/atom-syntax/mail-archive/msg13691.html
