Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: To Do

Expand Messages
  • Randy Morin
    ... Agree, let s lose 24. But further, the statement RSS documents that conform to this specification also conform to its predecessor. No changes have been
    Message 1 of 5 , Feb 13 1:03 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In rss-public@yahoogroups.com, "rcade" <rcade@...> wrote:
      > > As it stands now, the current draft makes the contradictory claim
      > > that 24 is a valid value for the <hour> element, and that all
      > > documents that conform to this draft also conform to RSS 2.01
      > > revision 6.
      >
      > If that's how the inclusion of an hour value of 24 is being perceived
      > (as a change to the format), I'd favor losing value 24.

      Agree, let's lose 24. But further, the statement "RSS documents that
      conform to this specification also conform to its predecessor. No
      changes have been introduced to the format." is likely impossible to
      respect. I would suggest removing it.

      Randy
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.