W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > October to December 2013

Re: [apps-discuss] FYI: LINK and UNLINK

From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 22:59:40 -0700
Message-ID: <CABP7Rbfy7aT+fccH97BsXoprsCyAkFp_Un0H8yHhrd=bpBtpVQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Cc: IETF Apps Discuss <apps-discuss@ietf.org>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On Oct 28, 2013 10:48 PM, "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net> wrote:
>
>
> On 24/09/2013, at 5:17 AM, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Just a general FYI... I have submitted iteration -04 of the
> > LINK/UNLINK draft with a few minor editorial fixes... and, I have
> > formally requested Last Call status as an Independent Submission on
> > the Standards Track.
> >
> >  http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-snell-link-method-04
>
> In Section 2 of -05:
>
> "For any pair of resources, exactly one relationship of any given type
can exist."
>
> That's a new and apparently backwards-incompatible change to the model of
linking on the Web... e.g., consider "stylesheet".
>

No, read it again, as a uniqueness constraint on the tuple (resource, link
relation, resource). That's not new or novel.

> Also, can these methods be made conditional?
>

Yes. Of course.

> Cheers,
>
> --
> Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 29 October 2013 06:00:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 11:11:18 UTC