Subject: Question on undefinedAttribute/Content

From: Jan Algermissen <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 10:29:50 +0200

Hi,

RFC4287 distinguishes between 'undefined' and 'extension' constructs.  
I am understanding the distinction to imply that conformant software  
should provide for handling extension elements, but can and should  
ignore any occurrences of undefinedAttribute or undefinedContent.

Is that understanding correct?

Thanks,

Jan

---

From: "A. Pagaltzis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 15:48:14 +0200

* Jan Algermissen <[email-masked]> [2006-10-18 10:45]:
> RFC4287 distinguishes between 'undefined' and 'extension'
> constructs. I am understanding the distinction to imply that
> conformant software should provide for handling extension
> elements, but can and should ignore any occurrences of
> undefinedAttribute or undefinedContent.
> 

Yes. To be precise:

Extension constructs are any markup which the software knows to
interpret.

Undefined markup is anything it doesn’t know to interpret. In
particular, this includes any future additions to Atom itself.

Regards,
-- 
Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>

---

From: "Thomas Broyer" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 16:47:19 +0200

2006/10/18, A. Pagaltzis:
> Undefined markup is anything it doesn't know to interpret. In

Nope!

Extension is what's covered by section 6.4, child elements of
atom:entry, atom:feed, atom:source and Person constructs.

Undefined markup is every other markup not defined by the spec:
attributes on any atom:* element, and child elements and text inside
other elements (atom:category, atom:link, etc.)

Whether the application knows what to do with markup, it's still
extension markup (e.g. thr:in-reply-to) or undefined markup (e.g.
thr:replies-count).

-- 
Thomas Broyer