- From: Alexey Feldgendler <alexey@feldgendler.ru>
- Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2006 13:08:08 +0600
On Fri, 08 Dec 2006 04:31:25 +0600, Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote: >>>> <!DOCTYPE HTML> >>>> <title>Feeds for this site</title> >>>> <link rel=feed href=status.xml> >>>> <link rel=feed href=news.xml> >>>> <link rel=feed href=links.xml> >>>> <p>This page links to the three feeds for this site. >>> status.xml is just a resource that provides a syndication feed. It is not >>> necessarily associated with a particular Web page. >> If there is no particular relation, then it should not be <link>. The >> <link> element is for resources which are in specific typical relations >> to the current document. > This is not how <link> is defined in HTML5. 3.8.4: "The link element allows authors to indicate explicit relationships between their document and other resources." What kind of explicit relationship do we have here? >> I would mark it up like this: >> >> <h1>Feeds for this site</h1> >> <ul> >> <li><a href="status.xml" type="application/atom+xml">Status feed</a></li> >> <li><a href="news.xml" type="application/atom+xml">News feed</a></li> >> <li><a href="links.xml" type="application/atom+xml">Links feed</a></li> >> </ul> >> >> Note the absence of rel attribute on the <a>: there is no specific >> typical relation between the current document and the referenced >> resources. > > Then the browser wouldn't take these links and make them available in a > "list of feeds" interface, which is the problem we are trying to solve. Current browsers easily make lists of all links found on the page by enumerating all <a> elements. I can't see why a list of feeds cannot be a subset of that. The type attribute gives enough information for this, especially if combined with the proposed ";type=feed". -- Alexey Feldgendler <alexey at feldgendler.ru> [ICQ: 115226275] http://feldgendler.livejournal.com
Received on Thursday, 7 December 2006 23:08:08 UTC