Ok, draft is updated with the new syntax for the hash attribute.
http://www.ietf.org/staging/draft-snell-atompub-link-extensions-05.txt
There is also one additional 'media' attribute added. I wanted to wait
to add it until after I was sure the other three attributes were fine.
The 'media' attribute serves the same purpose as the 'media' attribute
on HTML5 links... the value is a media query. For example:
<link href="foo" media="handheld and (min-width = 20cm)" />
The use case is to be able to provide multiple links targeted at
specific types of media... e.g. screen, print, mobile devices, etc.
Another change that I am contemplating making is introducing a new
child element for the atom:link element that would allow it to serve
the same basic purpose as the GData feedLink and entryLink elements
except with greater flexibility... specifically, it would allow a
representation of the linked resource to be dropped directly into the
link element, e.g.
<link rel="alternate" href="foo" type="text/plain">
<data type="text">this is a representation of the data</data>
</link>
<link rel="alternate" href="foo" type="image/jpeg">
<data type="encoded">abc...def==</data> <!-- base64 -->
</link>
<link rel="alternate" href="foo" type="application/atom+xml">
<data type="markup">
<feed>...</feed>
</data>
</link>
Or something along those lines.
Thoughts?
- James
On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 10:44 PM, Peter Keane <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 11:00 PM, Sam Johnston <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Are the commas earning their keep? If they're unnecessary then remove them,
>> otherwise LGTM.
>> Sam
>
> I was going to ask the same question. (re: the commas)
>
> --peter
>
>>
>> On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 7:36 AM, Bob Wyman <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> +1 LGTM
>>>
>>> On May 16, 2010 11:29 PM, "James Snell" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Ok, although I seriously dislike having to do additional parsing on
>>> attribute values, the arguments made so far are valid and parsing hex
>>> encoded hash digests is -- fortunately -- quite simple to do. So let's
>>> go with the following syntax...
>>>
>>> hash = attribute hash { hash-list }
>>> hash-list = # ( token ":" 1*HEX )
>>>
>>> The token and HEX productions are defined by RFC2616...
>>>
>>> The spec would defer to the existing IANA registry for hash functions
>>> to define the "tokens"
>>>
>>> This would result in a syntax of...
>>>
>>> hash="md5:abc...xyz, sha-1:123...567, sha-512:xyz...abc"
>>>
>>> This seem acceptable to everyone?
>>>
>>> - James
>>>
>>> On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 11:46 PM, Sam Johnston <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> > James,
>>> > In consideration o...
>>
>
--
- James Snell
http://www.snellspace.com
[email protected]
