W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > December 2006

[whatwg] PaceEntryMediatype

From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2006 11:25:36 -0800
Message-ID: <457081B0.8080908@gmail.com>
You're right that the differentiation in the content-type is of less
importance but without it there's no way for me to unambiguously
indicate that a resource has both an Atom Feed representation and an
Atom Entry representation.  The best I could do is say "This things has
two Atom representations".  Keep in mind that I want to be able to
differentiate the types of alternate representations available without
having to look at any of the other rel keywords.

- James

Kyle Marvin wrote:
> [snip]
> I see the separation but I'm still missing a clear justifiication for
> it.  I don't see content-type as having anything to do with the
> "audience".  It's about what media format you'd get back if you
> dereference the href and rel is about how you can interpret/interact
> with it.   I feel like the primary audience for content-type is likely
> to be used in selecting some type of parser when retrieving the
> resource.  Orthogonal to this, the "rel" value assigns some semantic
> meaning to the resource (what does the entry or feed describe) and might
> also specify what interaction model you might expect via the href (ex.
> "edit" implies APP edit semantics on an entry resource).
> Cheers!
Received on Friday, 1 December 2006 11:25:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:08:30 UTC