Eric Scheid wrote:
On 20/1/06 5:13 AM, "A. Pagaltzis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
But we already have a name for doing that: it¹s called ³linking
to something.² Now, it¹d be useful to encourage people to add
`type` attributes to their `<a>` links, so tools could find them
just by looking at the page without spidering. But `rel` does not
add any information.
Here is a link to a resource:
<link type="application/atom+xml" href="..." />
Please explain how a tool can decide whether that is a link to a <atom:feed>
document, or is a link to an <atom:entry> document?
This is a general limitation of the media type definition, not with the
autodiscovery draft. We have the same problem differentiating
<atom:link type="application/atom+xml" href="..." />. This isn't a
problem that the autodiscovery draft needs to solve. If it's a problem,
solve it in the Atom format spec where the media type is defined.
On 20/1/06 4:05 AM, "Robert Sayre" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The spec is extremely well-written and reflects existing behavior.
The existing behaviour is based on the various incarnations of RSS where the
only document type involved are feeds. RFC 4287 introduces a new document
type, the Atom Entry Document, which autodiscovery-01 fails to take into
consideration. That doesn't meet my definition of "well-written".
I really don't believe this is going to be much of a problem in practice.
- James
