W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > July to September 2008

Re: [APPS-REVIEW] Metalink XML Download Description Format (draft-bryan-metalink-01)

From: Anthony Bryan <anthonybryan@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2008 19:41:25 -0400
Message-ID: <bb9e09ee0809021641xbe09664tb92cd623f51f6cad@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: "Dave Cridland" <dave@cridland.net>, "general discussion of application-layer protocols" <discuss@apps.ietf.org>, "Applications Review List" <apps-review@ietf.org>, xml-dev@lists.xml.org, ietf-http-wg@w3.org

On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 5:35 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
> Dave Cridland wrote:
>> ...
>> 11) Section 4.2.17: Does that "type" attribute totally suck? Of course,
>> you have to have it because every man, his dog, and his pet hampster has
>> decided that only HTTP is allowed, these days, for absolutely everything,
>> leading to a totally useless URI scheme which essentially fails to describe
>> the actual resource it's supposedly a locator for. Okay, rant over, back to
>> the review.
>> ...
> "4.2.17. The "metalink:url" Element
>   The "metalink:url" element contains the IRI of a file.  All IRIs
>   should lead to identical files, except in the case of type
>   "bittorrent" where the IRI should lead to a .torrent file."
> Actually, don't do that. Don't make the meaning of an element totally
> dependent on an attribute on it. If torrent files are a special case (can
> there be more...?), then define a separate element.

I'm sure there COULD be more, but I don't know of any other right now.

Do you suggest a torrent specific element, or something generic?

Thanks Julian.

(( Anthony Bryan ... Metalink [ http://www.metalinker.org ]
 )) Easier, More Reliable, Self Healing Downloads
Received on Tuesday, 2 September 2008 23:42:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:13:37 UTC