James M Snell wrote: > I wouldn't agree. Atom link relations can be intended for > automated use and/or for presentation to human users. > It depends on the definition of the rel attribute.
I agree with James and Aristotle that some link relations might be "intended" for human users. However, few clients actually present the atom links to users, so the only practical way to ensure the users see them is to put them in the atom:content as HTML links. If you put the links in the content *and* in atom:link elements, then if your users *do* happen to be using a client that exposes the atom links, then they will see each link twice. So, I think we should put links intended for people in atom:content *only* to avoid that redundancy which could lead to confusion. I think you would only want the user to be exposed to a "discuss" link if the client can do something useful with it. In that case, I think it makes sense to mark it up (only) with atom:link. However, your proposal doesn't explain how to do something useful with the link, and that is why it is difficult to see why rel="discuss" adds any value over alternative ways of marking up the link. Regards, Brian
