On May 4, 2006, at 3:43 PM, Thomas Broyer wrote:
Things would have been far easier if either a) atom:link were extensible
This assertion that atom:link is not extensible is simply, flatly, completely, wrong. I just went and reviewed 4287 and I think it is perfectly clear on this. I suggest that interested parties review sections 4.2.7, 6.3, and 6.4 and, if they still think there is any problem with child elements of <atom:link>, find language in the RFC which says something other than what those sections say. -Tim
