2006/7/27, James M Snell:
And within feed documents in the form of language-qualified alternate
links (e.g., <link rel="self" hreflang="fr" href="..." />, <link
rel="self" hreflang="de" href="..." />, etc)
You rather meant <link rel="alternate" hreflang="fr"
type="application/atom+xml" href="..." /> <link rel="alternate"
hreflang="de" type="application/atom+xml" href="..." />, weren't you?
;-)
From RFC4287:
1. The value "alternate" signifies that the IRI in the value of the
href attribute identifies an alternate version of the resource
described by the containing element.
[…]
3. The value "self" signifies that the IRI in the value of the href
attribute identifies a resource equivalent to the containing
element.
Here, you're linking to alternate versions of the resource (in
alternate languages), not to an "equivalent" resource (it's not
equivalent, because it's in another language).
…using xml:base rather than <link rel="self"/> would have been so much cleaner…
…or maybe at least rather a <link rel="live" /> or <link
rel="subscribable" />, because the rationale of rel="self" were "if an
aggregator is given a copy of a feed without information about its
original IRI, how can it find which URI to subscribe to?"…
--
Thomas Broyer
