On 9 May 2005, at 6:48 pm, Bill de h�ra wrote:
I think this exercise is *critical* for any piece of markup that is going to move from mandatory to optional. Either way, we should pin down spec language around the optionality of alternate feed links, or consciously decide we're not going to pin it down.
So you wouldn't support a proposal that removed a required element without explaining what it's absence meant (eg PaceAtomSummary), because you'd prefer one that leaves it much less ambiguous (eg PaceTextShouldBeProvided, which strongly encourages publishers to only omit atom:summary when none exists)?
The difference is in what can be concluded from the data, ie it's a 3-valued logic problem. Does the absence mean there's no alternate? Does it mean don't unknown? Do we need to care?
Answer Tim's question: "What observable difference in the behavior of software would be affected by this difference?"
Graham
