I know this discussion has occured before, but I would like to revisit
the question of why an atom:feed MUST contain at least one atom:link
element with a relation of alternate (-06 4.1.1).
The defintition of the alternate representation is it identifes an
alternate
version of the resource (Sec
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
EDITORIAL:
There are a couple of places where we use uri in the markup,
specifically the atom:uri element (3.2.2) and the uri attribute of
atom:generator (4.2.5).
In both cases they're not actually URIs, they're IRIs, so the name is
WRONG, except for nobody knows what
May I suggest HREF? It's address format and class agnostic.
Graham
On Mar 23, 2005, at 8:07 AM, Graham wrote:
May I suggest HREF? It's address format and class agnostic.
If I hadn't firmly promised myself that I would keep my damn mouth shut
about this, I'd be +1. -Tim
Hello Dan,
The problem I have with using web is that there is a pars pro
toto (or probably rather the other way) problem here. I.e.
the Web is defined by *all* the resources identified by an URI/IRI,
whereas the element we are trying to name points to just one of
them.
Given all the proposals, my
The non-normative HTML and XML versions, as well as diffs between -02
and -03 are
available here:
http://bitworking.org/projects/atom/
Thanks,
-joe
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 16:09:50 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line
Martin Duerst wrote:
url: -0.2 (outdated)
It may be outdated, but it is the one everyone is using and it is also
used by CSS.
--
Anne van Kesteren
http://annevankesteren.nl/
