On 5/3/06, James M Snell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Toru Marumoto wrote:
> Is the value of "app:accept" element extensible?
> Let's say I extended the Atom Entry Document using my own namespace.
> Then, Is this (below) appropriate thing to do?
> <accept>entry,MyExtendedEntry</accept>
>
No, the listing in accept is *only* a listing of media ranges and/or the
"entry" label and determines only what kinds of representations may be
POSTed to the collection. It does not differentiate between different
types of entries.
Right.. I should use atom:category to differentiate entry kinds, I guess.
What about extensions, though. It would be great if there is a way to indicate
what extension is acceptable(understandable) to a collection, kind of
like XML-RPC API's mt.supportedMethods.
I'm pretty sure there will be a lot of extensins such as "blog entry with
trackback extension","blog entry with readmore extension", "blog entry
with scheduled post extension" etc.
APP clients probably need to know before they attempt to actually
post an extended atom entry.
so how about something like...
<accept class="entry,application/atom+xml" readonly="false">
<extension namespace="http://purl.org/hoge";>MyExtension</extension>
<extension namespace="http://schemas.google.com/g/2005";>gd</extension>
</accept>
If you omit <accept /> entirely, then default is <accept class="entry"
readonly="false" />.
ok, please ingnore above example.... somebady help me out please.
