W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-dist-auth@w3.org > October to December 2009

Re: Comments on Action:draft-brown-versioning-link-relations-03

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2009 16:30:28 +0100
Message-ID: <4B0E9F14.807@gmx.de>
To: Sam Johnston <samj@samj.net>
CC: Jan Algermissen <algermissen1971@mac.com>, Atom-syntax Syntax' <atom-syntax@imc.org>, WebDAV <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
Sam Johnston wrote:
> Julian et al,
> 
> It's probably worth taking a look at 
> draft-johnston-addressing-link-relations 
> <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-johnston-addressing-link-relations-00> 
> as well as it defines both "current" and "latest" as well as 
> "canonical", "immutable", "mirror", "permalink" and my favourite, 
> "shortlink". This has been adopted by Wordpress, Drupal & others with a 
> view to bringing an end to third-party URL shortening services (the rust 
> of the Internet).
> 
> While I support link relations for versioning, I'd prefer to see 
> relations for generic addressing requirements consolidated in one draft.
> 
> Sam
> ...

Hi Sam,

I'm not convinced that throwing everything into a single document will 
be helpful; draft-brown-versioning-link-relations tries to focus on a 
small set of things, and, as Jan's feedback shows, it's non-trivial to 
get even those things right.

Do you have any *specific* comments with respect to the relations that 
it proposes?

Best regards, Julian
Received on Thursday, 26 November 2009 15:31:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 November 2009 15:31:11 GMT