Re: I-D ACTION:draft-nottingham-atompub-feed-history-09.txt

["Franklin Tse" <peaceable_whale@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

> Oops; I think you reported this previously, no? Will fix this in AUTH48.

Ya, I have reported this previously :)

> If someone can point me at a definitive place where Dave Winer cedes  
> control of the spec to the RSS Advisory Board, and says that that's  
> the new URI to use, I'll change it; I don't really want to dig too  
> deep into the morass of RSS politics.
> 
> I asked him and didn't get a response, and that's the most widely- 
> cited URL out there, according to the search engines; since it's an  
> informative reference in any case, it's good enough.

I have Cc-ed this email to the RSS-Public Mailing List and hopefully there will be an answer.

Thanks,
Franklin Tse

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@xxxxxxxx>
To: "Franklin Tse" <peaceable_whale@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "atom-syntax" <atom-syntax@xxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 19:08
Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-nottingham-atompub-feed-history-09.txt

> 
> On 24/04/2007, at 8:53 PM, Franklin Tse wrote:
> 
>> Two issues found.
>>
>> In "Example: Atom-formatted Complete Feed", there is no  
>> <description> element in Atom 1.0, <subtitle> should be used instead.
>>
>> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
>>    <feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom";
>>     xmlns:fh="http://purl.org/syndication/history/1.0";>
>>     <title>NetMovies Queue</title>
>>     <description>The DVDs you'll receive next.</description>
> 
> Oops; I think you reported this previously, no? Will fix this in AUTH48.
> 
> 
>> Also,
>>
>> 7.2. Informative References
>>
>>
>>    [RSS2]                          Winer, D., "RSS 2.0 Specification",
>>                                    2005, <http:// 
>> blogs.law.harvard.edu/
>>                                    tech/rss>.
>>
>> Should the reference be changed to http://www.rssboard.org/rss- 
>> specification by the RSS Advisory Board?
> 
> If someone can point me at a definitive place where Dave Winer cedes  
> control of the spec to the RSS Advisory Board, and says that that's  
> the new URI to use, I'll change it; I don't really want to dig too  
> deep into the morass of RSS politics.
> 
> I asked him and didn't get a response, and that's the most widely- 
> cited URL out there, according to the search engines; since it's an  
> informative reference in any case, it's good enough.
> 
> Cheers and thanks,
> 
> --
> Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/
> 
>