- From: Lars G. Svensson via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2019 10:50:59 +0000
- To: public-dxwg-wg@w3.org
@kamhayfung scripsit: > What if a server supplies content dynamically and does not wish to hard-code media type information in the URIs? In other words, would the following header also be a valid link to list the profiles for a resource? ... I don't think that's how it's supposed to work. [RFC 8288 §4.2](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8288#section-4.2) says that the definitions of the link relation types are in the [IANA link relation type registry](https://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml). In this registry the definition of "alternate" is taken from the [HTML 5 spec §4.8.6.1](https://www.w3.org/TR/html5/links.html#link-type-alternate) that says "The keyword \[alternate] creates a hyperlink referencing an alternate representation of the current document." I think it's a long stretch to say that we can use the same URI for the "self" relation and the "alternate" relation since that would imply that a resource is an alternate representation of itself. Maybe @mnot as author of RFC 8288 can give some perspective on this. -- GitHub Notification of comment by larsgsvensson Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/dxwg/issues/785#issuecomment-469634819 using your GitHub account
Received on Tuesday, 5 March 2019 10:51:04 UTC