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

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

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 17:01:30 +1100
Cc: IETF Apps Discuss <apps-discuss@ietf.org>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <D3F28AB3-624E-42BF-B657-6720FFB73D93@mnot.net>
To: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>

On 29/10/2013, at 4:59 PM, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> 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. 

Right. Thanks :)

> > Also, can these methods be made conditional?
> >
> 
> Yes. Of course.

Mention it in the text, then; it's not automatic. Examples would be good too.

Cheers,


--
Mark Nottingham   http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Tuesday, 29 October 2013 06:01:57 UTC

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