Am 23.10.2005 um 23:34 schrieb Mark Nottingham:
On 23/10/2005, at 1:04 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
I prefer 'subscribe' because it better describes the meaning and
intention behind the link, but I can live with 'current' if that is
the
consensus.
Well, Tim seemed to have a pretty strong -1 on 'subscribe', whereas
you say you can live with 'current'. So, at this point it looks like
'current', unless other people come forward. I flirted with "recent"
briefly; anybody strongly like that one?
Maybe it is clear to everyone but me...however i do not see the damage
done by using rel="self" instead of inventing a new relation. Could
someone bother to explain that?
I know the definition in the format spec says it points to an
"equivalent resource", but it also says that "This is the preferred URI
for retrieving Atom Feed Documents representing this Atom feed." I
probably do miss something important here, but
a) "equivalent resource" says either nothing or lets you enter a mine
field while roy t. machine guns you
b) "representing this Atom feed" requires some king of dualistic
thinking: the whole Atom feed is composed of several Atom feed
documents which are linked with "prev" and (maybe) "next" relations.
"self" points to the URI for the overall feed and has the same value in
all chained feed documents (or feed chunks as i would call them)
Can I convince anyone to enter the land where an Atom feed is composed
of one or more Atom feed documents?
Cheers, Stefan
