Nikunj R. Mehta wrote:
As I see it, whether there is a @rel=down-tree or not, you would have
to communicate certain information
out-of-band, e.g., depth of the tree or the level of completeness in every in-lined entry.
Right, which is why I'm not sure if the distinction between down and
down-tree is meaningful enough. You're still going to have to look at
the out-of-band info to figure out what you need to do with it.
<snip>
IMHO, ah:inlined does nothing because the presence of ae:inline makes
it plenty clear. If you were trying to say that there is a certain
level of depth in the tree, may be an attribute would help, but even
then you don't know what things the server may have elided from every
entry. So, bottom line is, there is not much value to an attribute to
describe the thing that is in-lined. You are best off using what you
have received as an approximation and then get the exact
representation if you care so much in a separate network call. Of
course, out-of-band communication or specialized mark-up may provide
enough information for you to avoid such round-trips.
+1
c. leverage link templates rather than link relations
I am not aware of "link templates". If you are referring to
draft-gregorio-uri-templates, then too there is no notion of templates
baked in to the link element yet.
This came from a discussion Al and I were having offline. Basically,
I've worked up some ideas on how to use Joe G.'s URI templates within an
Atom entry as a form of link-template. I need to get that fully documented.
- James
