Subject: remote content?

From: Robert Sayre <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 15:58:31 -0400

I don't think we ever resolved this last call issue. 

http://www.imc.org/atom-syntax/mail-archive/msg14383.html

Tim Bray wrote:
> OK, WG, what do you think? I have long supported the SHOULD here, but
> I can't help observing that a lot of different parties have
> questioned it, I'm not 100% sure it really has consensus support,
> even rough. Rob & John's alternative, as outlined above, seems like a
> fair trade-off that would better reflect the community consensus and
> not really harm interoperability. Anybody want to disagree?

Robert Sayre

---

From: Tim Bray <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 17:16:26 -0700

>> not really harm interoperability. Anybody want to disagree?

Correct, good catch.  I issued that call-for-disagreements on April 
22nd and there was only one quibble 
(http://www.imc.org/atom-syntax/mail-archive/msg14384.html), which was 
quite moderate.  I think it's clear that we have rough consensus that 
we should update the draft as suggested in the following posts:

http://www.imc.org/atom-syntax/mail-archive/msg14373.html (last para)
http://www.imc.org/atom-syntax/mail-archive/msg14378.html

   -Tim