- From: Brian Smith <brian@briansmith.org>
- Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2008 08:20:18 -0700
- To: "'James M Snell'" <jasnell@gmail.com>
- Cc: "'Nicolas Krebs'" <nicolas1.krebs3@netcourrier.com>, <atom-syntax@imc.org>, <public-i18n-its-ig@w3.org>
James Snell wrote: > It doesn't reserve the dir attribute in every namespace. The dir > attribute has no namespace and there's little difference > between it and the type attribute on the Atom Text Construct. > > RFC 4287 defines the Atom Text Construct as an abstract type. Within > that element, there is a type attribute. I can define that element > x:foo is a text construct such that <x:foo > type="html"><p>bar</p></x:foo> is a perfectly > legal construct. Of course. My point is that an extension cannot fully support the Atom BIDI extension if it uses the "dir" attribute for some other purpose. Further, an Atom processor cannot process the Atom BIDI extension for extension elements that it has no knowledge of, because it has no way of knowing what the "dir" attribute means for unknown extension elements. ITS avoids those problems by defining better namespace support. Regards, Brian
Received on Wednesday, 16 April 2008 15:20:54 UTC