- From: Lars G. Svensson via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2018 14:34:14 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
@jpullmann scripsit:
>* section 6.1.1.2 Using a HTTP Link header field
> * same holds for link relation, since performing a head on a resource (and not a profile) should not it read:
<link rel="profile" .. >?
It could make sense to add that too, since it would link the current resource (the representation specified in the `Content-Location` header, `Context IRI` in RFC 5988 lingo) to the profile. In this example I've chosen to use the same pattern for all representations of the generic resource. This is done by enumerating all existing representations of the resource as `Target IRI`s and their attributes `type` and `profile`. The linking from the `Target IRI` to the `Context IRI` is done through the `rel` attribute. When the `Target IRI` and the `Context IRI` are the same representation, the relation is `rel="self"`, in all other cases it's `rel="alternate"`. Does that clarify how the example is meant?
--
GitHub Notification of comment by larsgsvensson
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/569#issuecomment-438682337 using your GitHub account
Received on Wednesday, 14 November 2018 14:34:16 UTC