I agree, however, the format should be extensible enough to support broader use cases. With Atom extensibility, this is very easy to achieve without allowing the scope of the spec to creep too far.
- James A. Pagaltzis wrote: > * James M Snell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-10-04 17:30]: >> I would add to this information about what plugins have been >> applied and what templates have been used. These, of course, >> are not going to be portable to different blog environments but >> the information would be necessary in order to faithfully >> recreate the entries later. > > -1 > > These should be engine-specific extensions. The format should be > broad enough in scope that it can reasonably be used to transport > a weblog between engines, but not broader. What you’re looking > for is a full backup, but that’s a different use case than what > (I think) this spec aims for. > > Regards,
