W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > November 2007

[whatwg] HTML5 Edit Link Relation

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 15:31:14 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0711061529010.30809@hixie.dreamhostps.com>
On Mon, 5 Nov 2007, Martin Atkins wrote:
>
> James M Snell wrote:
> > This is just off the top of my head so I'm certain that there are
> > probably reasons why this wouldn't work, but could we not do something like,
> > 
> >   <link rel="edit put delete patch" href="http://example.org/foo" />
> > 
> > Edit indicates the purpose of the link, put, delete and patch indicate
> > methods (in addition to GET).
> > 
> 
> That doesn't tell you what sort of stuff you are allowed to PUT to that 
> URL, though. I'm not sure that HTML is really the place to tell you that 
> it expects an Atom entry, but without it knowing that it supports PUT is 
> not that useful either.
> 
> However, I guess one could argue that there should be something that 
> acts as the opposite of the "type" attribute: rather than the type that 
> should result when you GET, instead indicate the type that you should 
> PUT. Probably too tricky to be worth it, though: it'd probably need all 
> of the capabilities of the HTTP "Accept" header to be useful, and it's 
> questionable whether that much detail should be defined externally of 
> the resource itself.

It's an interesting idea, but as you say, I'm not sure we should do it 
immediately. It may be worth study for a future version though.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Tuesday, 6 November 2007 07:31:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 30 January 2013 18:47:42 GMT