On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 16:50:56 +0900, Martin Duerst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceIRI
I like it a lot in principle, my only concern is the dependency on an
IDN library (nicely put together Pace, btw). As noted this might be a
problem on small devices, but I
On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 16:04:16 +0900, Martin Duerst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have completed (as far as I'm concerned) PaceIRI.
Looks good, but I dislike this point:
«Do *not* replace element/attribute names that read 'uri'. This will
lead to somewhat strange sentences as The content of
At 22:33 05/01/11, Danny Ayers wrote:
On Tue, 11 Jan 2005 16:50:56 +0900, Martin Duerst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceIRI
I like it a lot in principle, my only concern is the dependency on an
IDN library (nicely put together Pace, btw).
Thanks!
As noted this
The biggest open issue (at least on the format side, and potentially on
the protocol side) is extensibility. I would like to see us get
*something* into the drafts; even if imperfect, it can be incrementally
improved upon.
So, I'm scheduling all the open extensibility and versioning paces for
/ Bill de hra [EMAIL PROTECTED] was heard to say:
| Henry Story wrote:
| Is there a DTD available for the current spec?
|
| DTD's won't help (elements aren't ordered). Norm Walsh and Dave Pawson
| had an rnc schema up somewhere; don't know if they are still keeping
| in sync with the spec.
I plan
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Atom Publishing Format and Protocol Working
Group of the IETF.
Title : The Atom Syndication Format
Author(s) : M. Nottingham, R. Sayre
Filename
http://www.atompub.org/2005/01/10/draft-ietf-atompub-format-04-from-3.diff.html
http://www.atompub.org/2005/01/10/draft-ietf-atompub-format-04.html
There are some editorial issues brought up on-list recently that aren't
addressed here.
I wanted to get the draft out so folks facing deadlines
[Reissuing with a corrected subject line]
Sam Ruby wrote:
The biggest open issue (at least on the format side, and potentially on
the protocol side) is extensibility. I would like to see us get
*something* into the drafts; even if imperfect, it can be incrementally
improved upon.
So, I'm
This sentence took me a long time to figure out its intended meaning:
Escaped markup is interpreted as a text representation of markup, and
MUST NOT be interpreted as markup itself.
By Escaped markup don't you just mean text? Or text containing
characters sometimes used for markup? Currently
