Re: Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-atompub-protocol-14.txt

[Asbjørn Ulsberg <asbjorn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 03:45:05 +0100, James M Snell <jasnell@xxxxxxxxx>  
wrote:

> Cool. Can we please last-call this darn thing now?

There are still issues with it. :) Please note Björn Höhrmann's  
complaint[1] about the missing 'alt' attribute. I also have some minor  
tweaks:

> 5.1 Retrieving a Service Document [2]

Could we add a reference to section 8 wrt discovery of the Service  
Document's URI? I at least asked myself the following question when  
reading the section: «Okay, you GET the Service Document -- but how do you  
know what URI to GET?». A reference to section 8 could clarify this.

> 9.7 The Slug: Header [3]
>
> Slug is a HTTP entity-header [...]

Replace 'a' with 'an', as 'HTTP' is pronounced with a wovel and not a  
consonant.

Also, has there been a discussion about using the 'Title'[4] header  
instead of inventing a new one for this purpose? In the same vein,  
couldn't atom:description be populated by the 'Content-Description'[5]  
header in various circumstances?

> 10.2 The "app:edited" Element [6]

What is the relation between 'app:edited' and the 'Last-Modified' HTTP  
header? Can this be explicitly mentioned somehow?

____
[1] <http://www.imc.org/atom-protocol/mail-archive/msg08245.html>
[2]  
<http://bitworking.org/projects/atom/draft-ietf-atompub-protocol-14.html#rfc.section.5.1>
[3]  
<http://bitworking.org/projects/atom/draft-ietf-atompub-protocol-14.html#rfc.section.9.7>
[4] <http://www.w3.org/Protocols/HTTP/Object_Headers.html#title>
[5] «8. Content-Description Header Field»:  
<http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2045.txt>
[6]  
<http://bitworking.org/projects/atom/draft-ietf-atompub-protocol-14.html#rfc.section.10.2>

--
Asbjørn Ulsberg     -=|=-    http://virtuelvis.com/quark/
«He's a loathsome offensive brute, yet I can't look away»