+1 if image is changed to logo or, even better, if image is
allowed in entry. I don't care whether icon is allowed in entry,
though I see no reason not to allow it.
-1. image should be exactly as it is in RSS, except with the
recommendation that it should be 1:1, instead of size recomendations.
There's also no reason to limit it to atom:head.
icon is silly.
link rel=icon should usher in the brave new world of HTML relations
leaking into the Atom space.
+1, agree with renaming image to logo. Disagree with allowing either in
entry, since their are already one million ways to do that (HTML,
[EMAIL PROTECTED], etc).
Graham
On 7 Feb 2005, at 7:08 pm, Antone Roundy wrote:
+1 if image is changed to logo or, even better, if image is
allowed in
PaceIconAndImage
+1
+1 to renaming atom:image to atom:logo
PaceMultipleImages
-1 : multiple language variants of anything seems to be well-kyboshed
anywhere in atom
On Thursday, January 27, 2005, at 09:08 AM, Antone Roundy wrote:
Also, why limit this to feed/head, and not entry?
If we ARE going to limit images to feeds, then please, let's change the
name to logo. If it were logo, I'd agree it doesn't belong in
entry.
Antone Roundy wrote:
Let me restate this in a way that might lead to action: I have a
sneaking suspicion that we're not going to get consensus on allowing
image and/or icon in entry. If that's the case, would anyone object to
me changing image to logo in the Pace?
That would be bogus a rule.
On Friday, February 4, 2005, at 12:37 PM, Robert Sayre wrote:
Antone Roundy wrote:
Let me restate this in a way that might lead to action: I have a
sneaking suspicion that we're not going to get consensus on allowing
image and/or icon in entry. If that's the case, would anyone object
to me
instead of link. So, I
ripped it out of PaceIconAndImage and created a new PaceMultipleImages
to suggest this.
Third, along with these other changes, the Pace changed the
atom:image aspect ratio from 2:1 to 1:1. Once again, this may be a
good idea, but it needs discussion. But I kind of think
The atom:icon element's content is a URI which identifies an
image which provides iconic visual identification for a feed. The
image SHOULD have an aspect ratio of one (horizontal) to one
(vertical),
and should be suitable for presentation in small size.
Is there any reason why the aspect ratio
Antone Roundy wrote:
The atom:icon element's content is a URI which identifies an
image which provides iconic visual identification for a feed. The
image SHOULD have an aspect ratio of one (horizontal) to one (vertical),
and should be suitable for presentation in small size.
Is there any reason
image instead of link. So, I
ripped it out of PaceIconAndImage and created a new PaceMultipleImages
to suggest this.
Third, along with these other changes, the Pace changed the
atom:image aspect ratio from 2:1 to 1:1. Once again, this may be a
good idea, but it needs discussion. But I kind
. I think this is probably a bad idea, but
I'm 100% sure that it's wrong to mix up this with the (entirely
separate) debate on whether to use image instead of link. So, I
ripped it out of PaceIconAndImage and created a new PaceMultipleImages
to suggest this.
+1. I wish more paces were
a Pace for this...
http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceIconAndImage
This competes with parts of PaceEnclosuresAndPix, and so have also written
PaceLinkEnclosure which simply strips out the Pix part.
http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceLinkEnclosure
e.
On 28/1/05 4:03 AM, Bob Wyman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also, why limit this to feed/head, and not entry? So that Atom
feeds will be easily convertible to RSS 2.0?
Converting *to* RSS 2.0 shouldn't be a goal or even a consideration
in any Atom related discussions. Only conversion *from* RSS
) you want to
an entry with link. Maybe we should rename the image element to logo?
Which brings me to PaceIconAndImage--the pace itself makes forbids
putting one of the attributes of Link Constructs in the elements
(@rel). Another of them (@href) is not accurately descriptive of what
it would
On 28/1/05 10:02 AM, Eric Scheid [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I used a Link construct to keep word count down
and now with -05 published there is no generic Link Construct. I'll update
the pace with all the necessary extra wordage and bloat.
e.
16 matches
Mail list logo
