Bill de hÓra wrote:
Mark Baker wrote:
IMO, it matters not that no spec prescribes the use of this media type for Atom 0.3 feeds. What matters is whether it's in use today, which we seem to agree is the case. This seems an important piece of information that implementors should know, which is my motivation for asking that it be called out in the "interoperability considerations" section of the template. Something like;
Interoperability considerations: Some existing agents and feeds that support the Atom 0.3 specification, make use of this media type despite Atom 0.3 not being compatible with Atom 1.0.
In the spirit of that point about 0.3 being served with the media type being an interop issue - what are the behaviors which will lead to interoperation? The above text is only leads one to ask "and I should do what here?" and doesn't say anything useful about what to do.
I'll also point out that there are atom 0.3 feeds being served with a mime type of text/html. And undoubtably there will be atom 1.0 feeds so served. The most we can do is to say that such things are invalid, and to work with the producers to correct this. The majority of the existing atom 0.3 feeds are produced by a relatively few producers. I am confident that these producers will convert over quickly. I am also committed to getting the word out quickly that atom 0.3 feeds are not to be considered valid. In particular, I plan to update the feedvalidator to note this as a problem (first as a warning, and later I will change this to an error). - Sam Ruby