W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2007

Re: Link Header draft

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 09:51:56 +1100
Message-Id: <171F1582-2CAA-4775-8823-106E8E980251@mnot.net>
Cc: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@gbiv.com>, "ietf-http-wg@w3.org Group" <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>

...assuming we want a registry. Doing so would be a fairly large  
change from the model of HTML -- where the profile attribute allows  
extensibility, and that of Atom, where URIs provide extensibility.


On 2007/02/17, at 5:49 AM, Ian Hickson wrote:

>
> On Fri, 16 Feb 2007, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>>
>> I don't know that either of these is workable, given that HTML and  
>> Atom
>> both use link relations.
>
> Atom has a document-level hyperlinking element with link types? I  
> thought
> the linking in Atom was from individual feeds, not from the whole
> document.
>
> If the linking in Atom is indeed from the whole document, such that it
> makes sense to have it apply at the HTTP level, and if those  
> relationships
> aren't compatible with HTML's, then we have a problem -- you can  
> easily
> imagine a CDF situation with mixed Atom and HTML with Link:  
> headers, and I
> can't see that either registry would "win" over the other. This would
> imply that HTTP would need yet another third registry for  
> disambiguation.
>
> -- 
> Ian Hickson               U+1047E                ) 
> \._.,--....,'``.    fL
> http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _ 
> \  ;`._ ,.
> Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'-- 
> (,_..'`-.;.'
>


--
Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Wednesday, 21 February 2007 22:52:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:50:00 GMT