The IESG wrote:
- 'Atom License Extension '
| Licenses associated using these mechanisms MAY or MAY not be
| machine readable
Isn't "MAY" always the same as "maybe not" ? I'd read a "MAY
or MAY not" as "maybe not or maybe", and in that case I wonder
why you talk about it.
| The IRI specified by the link's 'href' attribute SHOULD be
Apparently RFC 4287 uses the term <atomUri> wrt href, and it
says that a dereferencable IRI is in fact an URI as specified
in 3987. In other words, how about s/IRI/URI/ ?
| the presence of a license link relation within an Atom feed
| element does not extend a license over the various contained
| entry elements.
What else is this rel="licencse" about, if it's not about the
contained elements ?
| Likewise, the presence of a license link within an Atom
| source element does not extend a license over the
| informational content of the containing entry.
Same question, what's its purpose if it's unrelated to the
entry ? I'd get it if it's some kind of default for anything
below the next containing element.
If that's what you want a problem could be an overall feed
default with entries from other sources not providing their
Maybe you could say that any atom:author or atom:rights not
matching the atom:author or atom:rights of the rel="license"
breaks the relation. Or maybe it needs an explicit reset to
an unknown state, rel="licence" href="" (ugly, better solve
it in the spec.)
Ietf mailing list