On 2013-12-11 19:59, Marcos Caceres wrote:
On Wednesday, December 11, 2013, Julian Reschke wrote:
On 2013-12-11 13:13, Mounir Lamouri wrote:
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013, at 14:48, Marcos Caceres wrote:
Would any potential implementer consider supporting a HTTP
based solution
to loading manifests?
It seems quite premature to discuss a HTTP based solution to
advertise a
manifest. Even if it happens to be something developers ask for,
we will
anyway need to provide a <link> solution. It seems that the best
course
of actions we could take here is to implement the manifest
feature using
<link> and gather developer feedback to evaluate that alternative.
If you define a way using <link>, the alternative approach using the
Link: header field essentially comes for free.
Mark seems to imply otherwise: for example, Mark says that "[Link:] was
never specified to be used with the "stylesheet" relation".
https://github.com/w3c/manifest/issues/98#issuecomment-30293586
I see the comment but I have no idea what he's talking about.
The spec is generic; and the IANA registry
(<http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml>)
has a "stylesheet" entry.
Firefox implements this for CSS and XSLT, Opera (classic) did for CSS.
If that's the case, then neither would manifest? I also thought
Link: was more or less generic. I should read the spec in detail.
It's totally generic.
Best regards, Julian
