Yes, I currently work around using the IRI, as mentioned, to specify the relationship and that works fine. Re namesapces, I just think namespaces are plentiful already and add a little more work in terms of parsing. I'm applying them at the feed level, and as James Snell shows, they can be useful in entries also.
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of A. Pagaltzis Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2006 8:43 PM To: atom-syntax@imc.org Subject: Re: Link rel attribute "stylesheet" * James Yenne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-02-27 05:25]: >My feeds contain a generic xml-stylesheet, which formats the feed for >display along with a feed-specific css. Since xsl processors do not >have a standard way to pass parameters to xsl stylesheets, I provide >this feed-specific css to the xsl processor in the feed as a link with >rel="stylesheet". Smells like abuse to me. Id pass it to the XSL transform using a namespaced element instead, à la <feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom";> <css xmlns="tag:example.org,2006:Foo">/somewhere/over/the/rainbow.css</css> <!-- ... --> </feed> If you really dont want to put in a namespaced element for some (odd?) reason, you can use an IRI to specify the relationship: <atom:link rel="http://example.org/rel/stylesheet"; href="/somewhere/over/the/rainbow.css"/> I dont think a `stylesheet` relationship warrants adoption in the canon in any case. Regards, -- Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>
