On 06/05/2008 5:38 PM, Brian Smith wrote: > 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.
Thanks for the clarifications. I'm going to drop the idea for now, since I have many other higher-priority work items to complete, but I may revisit it in the future after I've thought about it more. Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
