James M Snell wrote:
Ok, distilled from this conversation...
1. Comments can either be included directly within the feed or in a
separate feed.
2. Comment entries are distinguished by a link @rel="in-reply-to"
@href="{$original-entry/atom:id}"
As an atom:id is an identifier that might (should?) not be
"dereferenceable", atom:link is not a good choice. An extension element
whose content is an URI/IRI (similar to atom:id) would be better:
<thread:in-reply-to>{$original-entry/atom:id}</thread:in-reply-to>
3. Comment feeds may be indicated using a link @rel="comments"
@href="{$comment-feed-url}" as a child of <feed />
3. Comment feeds may be indicated using a link @rel="comments"
@href="{$comment-feed-uri}". If used as a child of atom:feed, it links
to a feed containing all comments on all entries. If used as a child of
atom:entry, it links to a feed containing only the comments on the entry.
Example 1: Entries and comments in a single feed
<feed>
<entry>
<id>http://example.com/2</id>
<thread:in-reply-to>http://example.com/1"; </thread:in-reply-to>
...
</entry>
<entry>
<id>http://example.com/1</id>
...
</entry>
</feed>
Example 2: Comments in a separate, associated feed
<feed>
<link rel="comments" href="http://example.com/comments.xml"; />
<entry>
<id>http://example.com/1</id>
<link rel="comments" href="http://example.com/1/comments.xml";
title="Comments on this entry" />
</entry>
</feed>
<feed>
<entry>
<id>http://example.com/2</id>
<thread:in-reply-to>http://example.com/1</thread:in-reply-to>
...
</entry>
</feed>
The in-reply-to link could also be used in feeds that are not directly
associated with the source feed. e.g. if you post an entry in your
blog and I post a reply to that entry in my blog. My entry can use
the in-reply-to link so that thread aware readers can make the
connection appropriately.
Your entry should also link to a representation of the "commented
resource" using an atom:[EMAIL PROTECTED]"related"].
And if you're relaying information, you could use an
atom:[EMAIL PROTECTED]"via"], as proposed in
http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceLinkRelVia
Question: could the @rel="comments" link be handled appropriately
using the existing @rel="related"? The question hinges on whether or
not it is semantically important to distinguish "comments" from other
types of related entities. I'm not convinced it is. If a
@link="related" points to an Atom feed, who cares what that feed
contains, the user agent can make the feed available for the user to
subscribe to pulling in the relevant entries.
I don't know yet...
--
Thomas Broyer
