- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2009 10:18:52 +1000
- To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Cc: Sam Johnston <samj@samj.net>, Hadrien Gardeur <hadrien.gardeur@feedbooks.com>, Atom-Syntax Syntax <atom-syntax@imc.org>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>, apps-discuss@ietf.org
On 24/09/2009, at 7:37 PM, Ian Hickson wrote: > > It would certainly be an improvement, though I'm still unconvinced > that we > want different definitions for the same link type for different MIME > types. Difference conformance classes, sure, but that's another issue. Yes, that's the tricky part; there would be a tendency to define different meanings for different mime types, no matter how clearly it's stated that the additional information was restricted to the interpretation/implementation of the relations. -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Sunday, 27 September 2009 00:19:49 UTC