On Thursday, May 5, 2005, at 01:27 AM, fantasai wrote:
And for linking to other pages.. Here's a real-world example:I'm beginning to sway in the direction of this argument, but I'm not sure whether I'll sway back or not. Given that @type will clearly (for Atom and RSS 2 anyway, if not for RSS 1) identify the feed as a feed (...or maybe an Atom Entry Document...the feed reader can deal with that issue when the user tries to subscribe), I don't think there's a big need for @rel to say "feed". But it wouldn't be illogical for use "alternate" for only the feed associated with a particular page (perhaps including the case of an individual entry archive page), and something else like "related" to point to other feeds. A UA could check @rel and @type and present a UI saying something like "subscribe to the feed for this page" and "subscribe to a feed related to this page".
The mozilla.org main page <http://www.mozilla.org/> is an example
of where rel="alternate" is a problem. There were three feeds on
it: "Announcements", "mozillaZine News", and "Mozilla Weblogs"
(now only two). Each one is an alternate of a web page, but of
_other_ pages (http://www.mozilla.org/news.html, http://www.mozillazine.org/, and http://planet.mozilla.org/ respectively), not the mozilla.org
front page. The last few headlines for each feed are listed on
the front page, and the designer felt it was appropriate for
autodiscovery to work on this page -- but it is not appropriate
for rel="alternate" to be used for those autodiscovery links.
They are not alternate representations of the front page.
