On 11/29/06, Jan Algermissen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Mark,
would you suggest to put service and categories into application/atom+xml as
well?
I haven't paid much attention to those, but AFAICT they have different
processing models (e.g. extensibility rules) and so IMO, comprise
different document formats. Separate media types are fine.
Hmm, ah, I think I see what you mean: When a peer declares it understands
application/atom+xml the understanding of <entry/> is mandatory anyhow. Despite
the additional inspection into the documents root element feed and entry belong into
the same family you cannot have one without the other therefore the media type should
not be split.
Is that what you think?
Yes, but more than that. An entry document is, AFAICT, little more
than shorthand for a feed with one entry, minus the feed-specific
metadata. It's processing is a subset of feed processing. If the
processing or content model of entry is extended, it applies to both
feed documents and entry documents.
And +1 to what Henry just said in response to James. It's also not a
huge deal to me. But I've just raised the rel="feed" inference issue
with the WHAT WG, so we'll see how that goes; if resolved to my
liking, then there's one less reason for a new media type.
Mark.
