That's what I thought too, but the words in the spec don't bear it
out; a "resource equivalent to the containing element" is a little
hard to interpret (there is no equivalence function for Web
resources, by definition), but it's a lot closer to "something you
dereference to get the same thing as what's in the containing
element" than to "something you dereference to get a potentially
completely different thing."
Arguably, there is sometimes a use case for the current definition of
"self", so it's probably best to just define a new link relation.
On 14/10/2005, at 10:28 AM, Thomas Broyer wrote:
Mark Nottingham wrote:
How about:
<atom:link rel="subscription" href="..."/>
?
I always thought this was the role of @rel="self" to give the URI
you should subscribe to, though re-reading the -11 it deals with "a
resource equivalent to the containing element".
1. Isn't "a resource equivalent to the containing element" the same
as "an alternate version of the resource described by the
containing element"?
2. Is the answer to 1. is no then what does "a resource equivalent
…" mean? Is it really different than "the URI you should subscribe
to" (at least if @type="application/atom+xml")?
--
Thomas Broyer
--
Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
