On 24/5/08 1:50 AM, "Sylvain Hellegouarch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Although I don't disagree with you Eric, don't you think you have > slightlty too many "if"? There is only one "if" in my argument - the possibility that the capabilities and locations of the available collections could be expressed in formats other than Atompub Service Doc. > There has been no use case that you describe yet > and considering that the service document is hardly publicly displayed it > seems as reasonnable to narrow down to the AtomPub service document. What do you mean by "is hardly publicly displayed"? Do you mean you would see @rel='service' and decide not to display that link in a user interface (unlike other links like @rel='alternate')? Sounds like a reasonable course of action for service documents, regardless of their content type .. if only we had some way of indicating "this resource is a service document, doesn't matter what format it's expressed in" ;-) e.
