Subject: Last minute editorial suggestions

From: Graham <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 19:49:23 +0100

- In section 4.2.4 there's an obsolete reference to atom:head

- In section 3.1.1.3, the text "The XHTML div element itself MUST NOT  
be considered part of the content" is inadequate. Replace with (or  
add): "The intended value of the content is contained within the  
XHTML div, and the div itself MUST be discarded." (I sort of  
suggested this before)

- In section 4.2.7.1 "Comparing atom:id", the two lists give the  
impression of "these ones are different" and "but, these ones are the  
same" when reading quickly. I'd suggest either merging the lists and  
discussing the implications at the bottom, or moving the discussion  
to the top of each list:

"For example, these are four distinct identifiers, despite their  
differences in case:

http://www.example.org/thing
http://www.example.org/Thing
http://www.EXAMPLE.org/thing
HTTP://www.example.org/thing
Likewise, these are three distinct identifiers, because IRI %- 
escaping is significant for the purposes of comparison:

http://www.example.com/~bob
http://www.example.com/%7ebob
http://www.example.com/%7Ebob"

Graham

---

From: Robert Sayre <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 3 May 2005 11:14:34 -0400

> XHTML div, and the div itself MUST be discarded." (I sort of

Why is it inadequate? I don't think the suggested text is any clearer,
since "MUST be discarded" isn't very meaningful or accurate. If it
refers to what happens when an implementation takes the HTML and puts
it somewhere else, we're definitely not going to be specifying that.
It's better to describe what the markup means whenever possible.

> discussing the implications at the bottom, or moving the discussion

Looks good.

Robert Sayre