W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2009

Re: Input on request for link relation

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2009 10:18:52 +1000
Cc: Sam Johnston <samj@samj.net>, Hadrien Gardeur <hadrien.gardeur@feedbooks.com>, Atom-Syntax Syntax <atom-syntax@imc.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, apps-discuss@ietf.org
Message-Id: <05DF2FC9-1DB6-48A6-91B1-500BC4FDA79B@mnot.net>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>

On 24/09/2009, at 7:37 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> It would certainly be an improvement, though I'm still unconvinced  
> that we
> want different definitions for the same link type for different MIME
> types. Difference conformance classes, sure, but that's another issue.

Yes, that's the tricky part; there would be a tendency to define  
different meanings for different mime types, no matter how clearly  
it's stated that the additional information was restricted to the  
interpretation/implementation of the relations.

Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Sunday, 27 September 2009 00:19:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:10:51 UTC