Tim Bray wrote: >[snip] > HTTP/1.1 201 Created > Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2005 17:17:11 GMT > Content- Type: application/atom+xml; charset="utf-8" > Content- Location: http://example.org/edit/first-post.atom > Location: http://example.org/edit/first-post.atom > > <?xml version="1.0"?> > <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom";> > <title>A picture of the beach</title> > <id>urn:uuid:1225c695-cfb8-4ebb-aaaa-80da344efa6a</id> > <updated>2003-12-13T18:30:02Z</updated> > <author><name>John Doe</name></author> > <content type="image/png" src="http://example.org/media/img123.png"/> > <link rel="edit" href="http://example.org/edit/first-post.atom"; /> > <link rel="edit-resource" > href="http://example.org/edit/img123.png"; /> > </entry> >
The entry would require a <summary /> tag, but other than that, yes. (I noticed in the pace that the <summary /> is omitted. The server would either leave that summary empty or would populate it with some default data (as it would with the author name, updated, id, etc) > So, in human-readable terms, using the new terminology: I post a media > resource and I get back a media link entry which describes it. If I > want to change the atom:title, I do a put on the [EMAIL PROTECTED]"edit" URI. > If I've photoshopped the picture and want to refresh it, I do a PUT on > the [EMAIL PROTECTED]"edit-resource" URI. If I want to remove it, I do a > DELETE > on [EMAIL PROTECTED]"edit". If I do a DELETE on [EMAIL > PROTECTED]"edit-resource", > that's a bug. > Right. However, note that a feed publisher could use the same URI for both the edit-resource and edit links. > I don't want to say the media link entry "represents" the media > resource, because that could cause confusion with the word > "representation" as bandied-about in Web Architecture. Thus "describes". > > The way I got here was I wrote a long posting to point out what I > thought was a subtle bug and in the process realized I didn't fully > understand the proposal. So if people agree with the interpretation in > the paragraph above, I'm going to write some draft test for the spec to > say more or less that and try to head off others from making the same > error I made. -Tim > > Sounds good. - James
![http://example.org/media/img123.png"/](http://example.org/media/img123.png"/){kind=link}
![http://example.org/edit/img123.png"](http://example.org/edit/img123.png"){kind=link}