2006/1/21, Robert Sayre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > On 1/19/06, Robert Sayre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > But, I could be in the minority. Which WG members think we should work > > on exciting new HTML link relations? > > > > Wow. Nobody.
I really think autodiscovery shouldn't use the link relation at all: <title>Welcome to my blog</title> <link rel="alternate" type="application/atom+xml" href="feed.atom" title="Subscribe to the Atom Feed" /> <title>My dummy entry</title> <link rel="start" type="text/html" href="/" title="This blog's home page" /> <link rel="start" type="application/atom+xml" href="feed.atom" title="Subscribe to this blog's Atom Feed" /> <link rel="alternate" type="application/atom+xml" href="dummy.atom" /> Why not use the "media" attribute? <link rel="whatever" type="application/atom+xml" href="feed.atom" media="subscribe" /> <link rel="whatever" type="application/rdf+xml" href="feed.rdf" media="subscribe" /> If you have feeds dedicated to some media (mainly screen –full content or video enclosures–, handheld –summary-only or title-only, or low-quality enclosures– or aural –audio-only enclosures–), add that media in the comma-separated list: <link rel="whatever" type="application/atom+xml" href="articles.atom" media="subscribe" /> <link rel="whatever" type="application/atom+xml" href="videos.atom" media="subscribe, screen" /> <link rel="whatever" type="application/atom+xml" href="audio.atom" media="subscribe, aural" /> I'm not sure how the comma-separated values should be interpreted in HTML (subscribe OR aural, or subscribe AND aural?), it might be better to replace the previous list values with a single "parameterized" value (e.g. "subscribe audio", "subscribe video", "subscribe text", "subscribe audio video", etc.) -- Thomas Broyer
