On 5/5/05 4:02 AM, "Thomas Broyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Robert Sayre wrote: >> The autodiscovery spec is a reasonable interpretation of the *one >> line* definition of the 'alternate' relation. It is not contradictory. > > But a feed is not a "substitute version" of an "archive page" as most > archived entries are not in the feed anymore. > > That said, I'm totally in favor of using rel="alternate" to link to a > feed from the _alternate_ HTML version. > > From an archive page, you should rather use rel="start". The problem is, an automaton wouldn't know which to use as it wouldn't know if the page it is looking at is an entry archive page or a recent entries page, which rather defeats the purpose of "auto-discovery". Also, it would be entirely reasonable to use @rel='alternate' to point to an @type='application/atom+xml' Atom Entry Document from an archive page. Furthermore, from a recent entries page it would also be entirely reasonable to use @rel='start' to point to the first archive entry page. Thus, the meanings of 'alternate' and 'start' would be *reversed* depending on what kind of page you were looking at. This is not conducive to hands-free "auto" discovery. Using @rel='feed' from both kinds of pages fixes that problem. e.
