On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 17:03:09 -1000 (HST), Lucas Gonze [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Then my point is moot as long as XHTML inline content may be XHTML 1.0
Transitional. A second argument that inline XHTML may be XHTML 1.0
Transitional is that it satisfies the need for well-formed XML.
You do
On 27/1/05 6:23 PM, Henri Sivonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But type='TEXT' is only a degenerate case of type='XHTML' (type='XHTML'
with only text content). What value does type='TEXT' add to the format
except the ability of feedvalidator.org to detect cases where there are
element children
Thanks for the reply, Sam.
I think the misunderstanding has mostly to do with the fact that we
have similar
but slightly different aims. We should try to clearly establish our
respective aims
and find the points we have in common, so that we can agree to solve
the points
we have in common
On 27/1/05 7:26 PM, Henri Sivonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd prefer an element, because the nature of the favicon reference is
not that a user would want to manually follow the link. That is:
icon src='...' or icon href='...'
I've drafted a Pace for this...
On Jan 27, 2005, at 09:41, Tim Bray wrote:
OK, you've advanced this argument several times now. If you want to
change the Atom format to remove type=TEXT, write a Pace (it'll be
short easy) and see if you can build consensus.
http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceTypeTextRedundant
I have to
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 21:39:23 -0500, Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
PaceAttributeNamespace does not do that. All it says is is that a given
namespace may be used. For what purpose such a statement is made is
entirely unclear.
Ok, maybe a little more explanation is needed in the Pace. The
Henry Story wrote:
Graham the Robot [1], when real people come and ask me something I'll
talk to them.
Rudeness objection. I'm seeing genuine questions; fobbing them off (as
above) is not helping your case.
cheers
Bill
Danny Ayers wrote:
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 21:39:23 -0500, Sam Ruby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
PaceAttributeNamespace does not do that. All it says is is that a given
namespace may be used. For what purpose such a statement is made is
entirely unclear.
Ok, maybe a little more explanation is needed in
resending with more appropriate subject line, just in case these two new
paces got lost in the thread...
I'd prefer an element, because the nature of the favicon reference is
not that a user would want to manually follow the link. That is:
icon src='...' or icon href='...'
I've drafted a
I only noticed this thread after looking at the same material through
RDF-tinted spectacles.
A question for the schema mavens: is there *any* clear way of
describing the difference between the three content types
(TEXT/HTML/XHTML) in a machine readable fashion?
In the Rosy-tinted Description
On Wednesday, January 26, 2005, at 10:40 PM, Eric Scheid wrote:
so, icon ... or favicon.
I prefer the latter.
I prefer the former. favicon = favorites icon. I think
favorites is a bad name for bookmarks--a person's reason for
bookmarking something (or in the case of Atom, subscribing to a
On 27 Jan 2005, at 15:28, Bill de hÓra wrote:
Rudeness objection.
One reaps what one sows. [1]
I'm seeing genuine questions
Since you are asking, I'll answer them.
On 26 Jan 2005, at 4:37 pm, Henry Story wrote:
I think your assertion is wrong. If they are consuming or producing
extended Atom [1]
Graham wrote:
On 27 Jan 2005, at 1:34 pm, Sam Ruby wrote:
http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceTypeTextRedundant
There are cases where explicit is better than implicit.
Yes. It's more a psychological rather than a technical difference, but
I think it's important (it's like the difference
On Jan 27, 2005, at 17:50, Tim Bray wrote:
On Jan 27, 2005, at 4:46 AM, Eric Scheid wrote:
however, the spec says:
The content SHOULD be XHTML text and markup that could
validly appear directly within an xhtml:div element.
which could lead others to make the same mistake I must have made.
Bill de hÓra wrote:
Norman Walsh wrote:
Someone sent me this, noting that it was not valid according to the
grammar I posted. He thought it was legal according to the spec,
and I'm not sure. What say you?
My first thought is that unless there a use-case for multiple content
blocks, you've found
Antone Roundy wrote:
On Thursday, January 27, 2005, at 12:47 AM, Eric Scheid wrote:
On 27/1/05 6:23 PM, Henri Sivonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But type='TEXT' is only a degenerate case of type='XHTML' (type='XHTML'
with only text content). What value does type='TEXT' add to the format
except the
On Jan 27, 2005, at 19:30, Antone Roundy wrote:
Given how common it is even for us, when posting examples of content
type=XHTML without declaring the XHTML namespace, might it be a
good idea to specify a mandatory method of declaring the XHTML
namespace to ensure that implementors don't forget?
Danny Ayers wrote:
Yes and no - there is demand for this kind of thing, is the RSS 1.0
community the same as the RDF community? There's a lot of additions
around there... Whatever, even with RSS 2.0 there's Easy News Topics
and all the stuff associated with media (enclosures + Yahoo's
extensions)
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
On 28/1/05 4:03 AM, Bob Wyman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also, why limit this to feed/head, and not entry? So that Atom
feeds will be easily convertible to RSS 2.0?
Converting *to* RSS 2.0 shouldn't be a goal or even a consideration
in any Atom related discussions. Only conversion *from* RSS
On 28/1/05 3:08 AM, Antone Roundy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also, why limit this to feed/head, and not entry? So that Atom feeds
will be easily convertible to RSS 2.0? Certainly there are ways to add
images to entries in RSS 2.0, though not icons (as far as I'm aware),
but I don't think
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 20:49:12 +, Bill de hÓra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Danny Ayers wrote:
Yes and no - there is demand for this kind of thing, is the RSS 1.0
community the same as the RDF community? There's a lot of additions
around there... Whatever, even with RSS 2.0 there's Easy
On 28/1/05 7:39 AM, Henri Sivonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If the value of type is XHTML, the content of the Text construct
MUST be a single xhtml:div element
-1 gratuitous element cruft. The text construct element itself serves
as a container.
but atom:title != xhtml:title
also, are
On 28/1/05 10:02 AM, Eric Scheid [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I used a Link construct to keep word count down
and now with -05 published there is no generic Link Construct. I'll update
the pace with all the necessary extra wordage and bloat.
e.
On Jan 27, 2005, at 22:30, Antone Roundy wrote:
I'm not in favor of mandating restrictions, because there are probably
legitimate uses for anything we might try to protect people against.
The namespace div places restrictions on where namespace declarations
appear and, therefore, limits the
On Thursday, January 27, 2005, at 10:38 PM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
On Jan 27, 2005, at 22:30, Antone Roundy wrote:
I'm not in favor of mandating restrictions, because there are
probably legitimate uses for anything we might try to protect people
against.
The namespace div places restrictions on
On 28/1/05 4:58 PM, Henri Sivonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
a:copyright type='XHTML'Copyright 2005 John Doe, h:emall rights
reserved/h:em/a:copyright
(assuming 'a' to be bound to the Atom namespace and 'h' to the XHTML
namespace) is less crufty than
a:copyright type='XHTML'div
On Jan 28, 2005, at 01:38, Eric Scheid wrote:
On 28/1/05 7:39 AM, Henri Sivonen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If the value of type is XHTML, the content of the Text construct
MUST be a single xhtml:div element
-1 gratuitous element cruft. The text construct element itself serves
as a container.
but
On Jan 27, 2005, at 22:39, Robert Sayre wrote:
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
So I can not include MathML in the TITLE of my weblog? I do not see
why this restriction is necessary.
Nope. Can any aggregator display it?
I expect Gecko-based aggregators to support MathML eventually. After
all, once you
Henri Sivonen wrote:
On Jan 27, 2005, at 22:39, Robert Sayre wrote:
Anne van Kesteren wrote:
So I can not include MathML in the TITLE of my weblog? I do not see
why this restriction is necessary.
Nope. Can any aggregator display it?
I expect Gecko-based aggregators to support MathML eventually.
30 matches
Mail list logo
