The atomURI label is adopted from RFC4287, which also uses the labels to accept IRI's. Yes, it is confusing, but given that this is an extension to RFC4287, I felt it was better to reuse the concepts than to redefine them.
- James Joel M. Halpern wrote: > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for draft-snell-atompub-feed-thread.txt. > For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at > <http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html>. > > Please wait for direction from your document shepherd > or AD before posting a new version of the draft. > > This document appears ready for publication as a Proposed Standard. > However, I have a question... > Several of the attributes have a type of "atomURI". However, reading > the text carefully, it is clear that they are actually IRIs. I suspect > that those have the same syntax. But since they have different > semantics, it seems odd for the syntax definition to refer to atomURI > rather than atomIRI. > > Thank you for addressing my earlier comments. > > Yours, > Joel M. Halpern > > ------ > GEN Atom Threading Extensions (Proposed Standard) > > <http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-snell-atompub-feed-thread-12.txt>draft-snell-atompub-feed-thread-12.txt > > Token: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Lisa Dusseault > Reviewer:Joel Halpern (reviewed -10 for LC) > > _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
