- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 17:01:30 +1100
- To: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
- Cc: IETF Apps Discuss <apps-discuss@ietf.org>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 29/10/2013, at 4:59 PM, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Oct 28, 2013 10:48 PM, "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: > > > > > > On 24/09/2013, at 5:17 AM, James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Just a general FYI... I have submitted iteration -04 of the > > > LINK/UNLINK draft with a few minor editorial fixes... and, I have > > > formally requested Last Call status as an Independent Submission on > > > the Standards Track. > > > > > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-snell-link-method-04 > > > > In Section 2 of -05: > > > > "For any pair of resources, exactly one relationship of any given type can exist." > > > > That's a new and apparently backwards-incompatible change to the model of linking on the Web... e.g., consider "stylesheet". > > > > No, read it again, as a uniqueness constraint on the tuple (resource, link relation, resource). That's not new or novel. Right. Thanks :) > > Also, can these methods be made conditional? > > > > Yes. Of course. Mention it in the text, then; it's not automatic. Examples would be good too. Cheers, -- Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Tuesday, 29 October 2013 06:01:57 UTC