A. Pagaltzis wrote:
> We started with the exact same mechanism you suggest:
> @rel='in-reply-to' links.
First, thanks for taking the to reply.
I think you might have skipped over or misunderstood my actual suggestion:
If so, then this mechanism should be generalized.
For example, I would like to use it for a "via" link
relation and the "related" link relation. For example,
it could be implemented as an "entry-link" element that
is just like atom:link, except that it has @ref and
@source.
In particular, note that I wasn't suggesting to use <atom:link> for this, but
rather a new element <entry-link>.
Let me ask my question a different way. If I want to say that an entry is
"related" to another entry, how can I do that? Currently, it is not possible.
So, should I use some kind of extension element like this?:
<related ref='atom-id' source='uri-of-feed' xmlns='something-i-make-up'/>
It seems wrong to me to have to define extension elements for every kind
inter-entry relationship, when the single atom:link element can handle
everything except inter-entry relationships using only one element. That is why
I suggested a more general mechanism would be better:
<entry-link rel='related' ref='atom-id' source='uri-of-feed'/>
<entry-link rel='in-reply-to' ref='atom-id' source='uri-of-feed'/>
<entry-link rel='via' ref='atom-id' source='uri-of-feed'/>
<entry-link rel='replies' ref='atom-id' source='uri-of-feed'/>
Basically, it would be exactly like the thr:in-reply-to element, except that it
would be able to handle other relationships between entries via the @rel
attribute.
Cheers,
Brian
