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

[whatwg] PaceEntryMediatype

From: Alexey Feldgendler <alexey@feldgendler.ru>
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2006 14:33:59 +0600
Message-ID: <op.tj6kqx1m1h6og4@feldgendler.plesk.ru>
On Wed, 06 Dec 2006 22:42:06 +0600, Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote:

>>> I mean that the feed might contain items that were never part of the page
>>> linking to the feed. For example, this page:
>>>
>>>    <!DOCTYPE HTML>
>>>    <title>Feeds for this site</title>
>>>    <link rel=feed href=status.xml>
>>>    <link rel=feed href=news.xml>
>>>    <link rel=feed href=links.xml>
>>>    <p>This page links to the three feeds for this site.
>>>
>>> There are no items on that page, but it links to three feeds that the site
>>> provides.

>> In your example, what's the relation between status.xml and this page?

> status.xml is just a resource that provides a syndication feed. It is not
> necessarily associated with a particular Web page.

If there is no particular relation, then it should not be <link>. The <link> element is for resources which are in specific typical relations to the current document.

I would mark it up like this:

<h1>Feeds for this site</h1>
<ul>
   <li><a href="status.xml" type="application/atom+xml">Status feed</a></li>
   <li><a href="news.xml" type="application/atom+xml">News feed</a></li>
   <li><a href="links.xml" type="application/atom+xml">Links feed</a></li>
</ul>

Note the absence of rel attribute on the <a>: there is no specific typical relation between the current document and the referenced resources.


-- 
Alexey Feldgendler <alexey at feldgendler.ru>
[ICQ: 115226275] http://feldgendler.livejournal.com
Received on Thursday, 7 December 2006 00:33:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:08:31 UTC