W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > November 2006

[whatwg] Alternate link clarifications [was Re: PaceAutoDiscoveryDraftIsPointless]

From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 18:09:39 -0800
Message-ID: <456CEBE3.80006@gmail.com>


Ian Hickson wrote:
> [snip]
> Here, while the last three are also valid feeds, it is the first one that 
> should be considered the default when doing auto-discovery. This isn't to 
> say that the feed UA should ignore the other three, or that it should only 
> show them if the user goes out of his way to obtain them -- indeed, the 
> "default" relationship could be completely ignored. It just means that if 
> it has to automatically pick one, then the first one is the one it should 
> pick. (It might also decide to only pick the one that is both a feed and 
> an alternative representation of the document, instead of picking the 
> default feed.)
> 

Hmm... Ok, I can live with that.

>>[snip]
>> Assuming that A includes alternate links to B and C, Can I assume that B 
>> is also an alternate of C; and vice versa?
> 
> Oh, you mean is the 'alternative' link type transitive? I guess so. I've 
> added a paragraph to the spec stating this.
> 

!@#$%! I was trying to think of that word all afternoon.  Yes, I was
meaning to ask if they were transitive.


- James
Received on Tuesday, 28 November 2006 18:09:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:58:49 UTC