Automated Content Access Protocol: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
the formal name has an exclamation mark, i.e. "Yahoo!"
Tag: Mobile edit
Comment and debate: numbered list to improve readability
Line 23:
 
==Comment and debate==
The project has generated considerable online debate, in the search,<ref>[http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/blog/060922-104102 Search Engine Watch article]</ref> content<ref>[http://shore.com/commentary/newsanal/items/2006/200601002publishdrm.html Shore.com article about ACAP]</ref> and intellectual property<ref>[http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/index.php?p=408&res=1280_ff&print=0 IP Watch article about ACAP]</ref> communities. If there are linkingany common themes to thein commentary, they are
# that keeping the specification simple will be critical to its successful implementation, and
# that the aims of the project are focussed on the needs of publishers, rather than readers. Many have seen this as a flaw.<ref name="douglas"/><ref>{{cite web |url=http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/technology/iandouglas/3624261/Acap_shoots_back/ |title=Acap shoots back |first=Ian |last=Douglas |date=2007-12-23 |work=[[The Daily Telegraph]] |publisher= |accessdate=2012-05-03}}</ref>
 
== See also ==