Hi James,
On Dec 1, 2006, at 11:25 AM, James M Snell wrote:
You're right that the differentiation in the content-type is of less
importance but without it there's no way for me to unambiguously
indicate that a resource has both an Atom Feed representation and an
Atom Entry representation. The best I could do is say "This things
has
two Atom representations". Keep in mind that I want to be able to
differentiate the types of alternate representations available without
having to look at any of the other rel keywords.
I understand that this is *what* you want, but I'm still unclear "why."
From where I sit, Kyle's argument makes sense: keep the syntax in
content-type, and the semantics in rel-type. This seems both simpler
and more consistent with how the web works today. No? Or is there
some overriding reason for ignoring rel-type?
-- Ernie P.
