James Holderness wrote: >[snip] > Section 4, paragraph 1: > "into a separate feed document" (singular document) > "its value is assumed" (no apostrophe) > > Section 4, last paragraph: > "neither does it explicitly allow" (is -> it) > > Section 6: > "Security considerations: (see section 5)" (6 -> 5) >
Fixed in the next draft. Thank you. > Not a proofreading issue, but shouldn't section 5 say something about > DOS attacks using replies links to third party servers? I wouldn't be > surprised if some clients automatically subscribed to all replies links > in a feed even if they were 100MB zip files on a completely different site. > Hmm.. this problem would apply generally to all types of Atom link wouldn't it? In any case, it likely would be good to at least mention that implementations should take care when using the replies link to automatically subscribe to feeds. - James
