* Bill de hOra [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-10-04 03:55]:
A. Pagaltzis wrote:
I think given the above background you'll agree that the
intent of the document is pretty coherent.
I couldn't tell whether new Atom extensions are foreign markup,
or something else to be dealt with under wrt being
Robert Sayre wrote:
I think we should move the format to Draft Standard by clearing up any
errata and adding two attributes: 'dir' and 'unicode-bidi', as defined
in XHTML.
Thoughts?
Foreign markup is ambiguous.
[[[
Markup from other vocabularies (foreign markup) can be used in an
Atom
* Bill de hOra [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-10-04 01:15]:
Perhaps this is what's intended by those statements:
Markup not defined in this document is called foreign markup
No, I seem to remember pretty clearly from discussion that what
it means is thus:
Markup not known to the consumer
A. Pagaltzis wrote:
I think given the above background you'll agree that the intent
of the document is pretty coherent.
I couldn't tell whether new Atom extensions are foreign markup, or
something else to be dealt with under wrt being a forward-compatible
friendly consumer. It's kind of
Bill de hOra wrote:
A. Pagaltzis wrote:
I think given the above background you'll agree that the intent
of the document is pretty coherent.
I couldn't tell whether new Atom extensions are foreign markup, or
something else to be dealt with under wrt being a forward-compatible
friendly
