On 10/05/2013 17:13 , Brian Kardell wrote:
Still, same kinda idea, could you add an attribute that allowed for it
to specify that it is available in a bundle? I'm not suggesting that
this is fully thought out, or even necessarily useful, just fleshing out
the original question in a potentially more understandable/acceptable way...
<img src='/products/images/clock.jpg'
bundle="//products/images/bundle.zip">
That's not very DRY!
That should be pretty much infinitely back-compatible, and require no
special mitigation at the server (including configuration wise which
many won't have access to) - just that they share the root concept and
don't clash, which I think is implied by the server solution too, right?
Well it does require some server mitigation since you need to have the
content there twice. It's easy to automate, but no easier than what I
had in mind.
Psuedo-ish code, bikeshed details, this is just to convey idea:
<link rel="bundle" name="products" href="//products/images/bundle.zip">
<img src='/img/dahut.jpg' bundle="link:products">
That just sounds more complicated!
I don't know if this is wise or useful, but one problem that I run into
frequently is that I see pages that mash together content where the
author doesn't get to control the head... This can make integration a
little harder than I think it should be.
Well, if you can't at all control the head, is there any chance that you
can really control bundling in any useful fashion anyway?
I'm not sure it matters, I suppose it depends on:
a) where the link tag will be allowed to live
You can use <link> anywhere. It might not be valid, but who cares about
validity :) It works.
b) the effects created by including the same link href multiple times in
the same doc
No effect whatsoever beyond wasted resources.
--
Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
