Eric Scheid wrote: >On 4/5/05 11:11 PM, "Robert Sayre" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>The autodiscovery spec is a reasonable interpretation of the *one >>line* definition of the 'alternate' relation. >> >> > >how is a feed of recent entries a "substitute version for the document in >which the link occurs" when that document is some blog post long since >dropped out of the feed? > I'd suggest placing the link element only on the front page of your blog if this is a concern. The feed usually is a "substitute version for the document in which the link occurs" for that, at least. There's nothing in the spec that even suggests you to place the autodiscovery information in archive pages. In practice, people probably will, but I'm not sure it's worth worrying about.
Do you have some example that's more generally applicable? -Nikolas 'Atrus' Coukouma
