[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: autodiscovery draft vs namespaces
Kornel, thanks for the input. In the next rev of the draft (following
the initial reboot that should publish in a day or so) I'll see what I
can do to clarifying some of these issues. As always, suggested spec
text is helpful and encouraged. I will do my best to incorporate all
Kornel Lesinski wrote:
> I've noticed that draft-ietf-atompub-autodiscovery-01.txt doesn't
> mention XML namespaces and tag prefixes. XHTML can get even more complex
> than memo suggests:
> <foo:link xmlns:foo="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" rel="alternate"
> type="application/atom+xml" href="bar"></foo:link>
> My suggestion is that instead of specifying all quirks of X[HT]ML syntax:
> * require that XML parser is used for XHTML
> * if document turns out not to be well-formed (which often is the case
> with real-world "XHTML"), allow HTML parsing rules used as fallback
> And then simply state that in XHTML <link> element in
> "http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" namespace should be used. An example
> XPath expression or W3C DOM-based pseudocode might be very helpful there.
> BTW: in all examples attributes have always the same order. They could
> be shuffled to emphasise that order is not significant.
> --regards, Kornel Lesiński