Re: New Version Notification for draft-divilly-atom-hierarchy-00

[Mark Nottingham <mnot@xxxxxxxx>]

On 27/05/2009, at 10:12 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:

> I do not agree with that conclusion, but nevertheless, just because  
> something is syntactically legal doesn't make it a good choice.

+1 - the clearest way to communicate what's going on here is to use a  
new child element.

Assuming that the contents of the link element are inlined content are  
adding an extension without explicitly identifying it; this may  
conflict with future uses. There isn't a way for an Atom processor to  
inspect a link element and know that the content is inlined; they have  
to guess that this specification is in effect, therefore the link  
content is the inlined content.  This isn't good practice.





--
Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/