- From: Jim Jewett <jimjjewett@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 11:01:50 -0400
On Wed, 16 Sep 2009, Erik Vorhes wrote: >> <entry> (which has already been proposed) might more logically suit the >> bill for standalone articles (in a blog or whatever) as well as >> blog/forum comments. And since it's part of the Atom spec., there's some >> precedent for defining its use. > Renaming <article> to <entry> might make sense, I guess. It seems like > it'd get more abuse, though. It sounds quite generic. To me, the problem is that it has other meanings. I would assume it was for some sort of input. Others might assume it was for some sort "good place to start reading", sort of like a fragment ID but clearly intended for even external links. Would these be a problem in actual usage? It probably depends on how quickly the name catches on with clear examples, so ... maybe. -jJ
Received on Wednesday, 23 September 2009 08:01:50 UTC