Andy Mabbett wrote: >>"By adding rel="enclosure" to a hyperlink, a page indicates that the >>destination of that hyperlink is intended to be downloaded and cached." > > I don't take issue with that definition; I simply don't believe that a > streaming audio feed, (say, one running 24/7, like BBC Radio 4's) can > ever be an "enclosure". > > Consider the usage "I have downloaded it and enclose it with this > e-mail".
Your issue has to do with the semantics of the word "enclosure", which unfortunately means something a bit different in the English language as it does in the computing realm. It's a valid point - and I'm a bit torn as you could interpret it in different ways. Like you said, one could use it in the following sense: "I have downloaded it and enclose it with this e-mail", which would be a valid use of enclosure. It all depends on what you're "enclosing"... are you enclosing the actual file or a reference to the file. My interpretation is that rel-enclosure states that you're "enclosing a reference to a representation of what you are discussing". A better analogy would be: "I have enclosed a device that will let you listen to this radio station.", as well. Or... "I have enclosed a portal to let you listen to this audio stream". I do admit, however, that this concept will be lost on those that don't know much about knowledge representation... so perhaps there is a better word than rel-enclosure? >>My preference is to resolve that rel-enclosure is applicable to both >>static and streaming files and note the decision on the rel-enclosure >>wiki page. > > In which case "enclosure" is a misnomer. "Embedded" might be better. It's better, but you can't really embed or enclose something that has no end or temporal boundary, can you? (unless we get into the realm of 5+ multi-dimensional physics). rel="manifestation", rel="download" or rel="representation" are more accurate. rel="download" is basically what we decided to use for the Media RDFa vocabulary (which the Audio RDFa vocabulary is layered upon): http://purl.org/media So, that's an option if we'd like to keep both vocabularies in sync, or offer rel-download as an alternative to rel-enclosure. The down-side is that rel-enclosure already exists and we should re-use when possible. Thoughts from the community? -- manu _______________________________________________ microformats-new mailing list [email protected] http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-new
