On 11/8/05 3:20 PM, "A. Pagaltzis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As long as producers throw in atom:[EMAIL PROTECTED]'related'] pointers > to the source as well, that base is covered anyway. I'd prefer to see atom:[EMAIL PROTECTED]"in-reply-to"]. Of course it's "related". All links in an entry point to related resources, that's the very definition of a link. We also know what the nature of the relationship is (it's in reply to that resource), so it doesn't hurt to specify that. James -- any chance of defining that in the comments draft, alongside the 'replies' link relation. You could then simplify the thr:in-reply-to element to just needing to handle the thr:idref case. e.
