- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 17:33:26 +0000 (UTC)
On Thu, 7 Dec 2006, Martin Atkins wrote: > > > > <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> > > This makes a lot more sense to me. When that orange button lights on up > on my browser's toolbar, I tend to think of it as "subscribe to this > page", not "subscribe to some random thing that happens to be on this > site somewhere and may or may not have anything to do with this page." > > rel="feed" the way Ian has defined it sounds more like type="feed" to > me. (ignoring of course the fact that the type attribute actually takes > a MIME type.) Yes, indeed. The primary difference is that type="" is specific to individual MIME types, whereas rel="" is a generic way of saying what the remote document is and how to process it (at least, that's what "relationship" in this context has come to mean). > I think it's much more likely in the above scenario that those links in > Alexey's example would be links to HTML documents containing the items > from the feed, and *on there* would be the feed auto-discovery stuff. > That's how I'd author it, anyway. (and also, by extension, how I'd > expect other sites to author it.) That's an option, yes; but I don't think we should restrict authors to those techniques. On Fri, 8 Dec 2006, Alexey Feldgendler wrote: > > > > 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? Hm, good point. Fixed. > > 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". But we don't want to restrict the types of feeds to just the currently supported MIME types. Whether something is a feed or not is independent of it's type. On Sat, 9 Dec 2006, Alexey Feldgendler wrote: > > > > Well they sort of have a relation -- they're feeds that the author > > thinks the user would find useful. > > This is no more tight a relation than "a page that the author thinks the > user would find useful", which is usually expressed with <a> rather than > <link>. Indeed. But I don't see that as a problem. > > This is something that happens already in the real world -- I'm just > > trying to make the spec distinguish "alternate" from "feed" when it > > comes to such feeds. > > Whoever is doing it abuses <link>. Only if we say it is abuse, which I don't think we should. What do we gain by classifying this as abuse? > rel="feed" means "the feed for the current document", rel="alternate" > means "an alternate representation of the current document". Therefore, > rel="alternate feed" means "alternate representation of the current > document by a feed". Actually the spec defines this in detail, and it doesn't quite match your definition. > > > Currently the orange RSS icon means "Subscribe to this page". This > > > is a lot more useful (in my opinion) than it meaning "subscribe to > > > some random thing". > > > No, it doesn't. It means "subscribe to something the author made > > available". Currently you have no way to know if it is the current > > page's feed or just a list of random related feeds. > > Surely the author could have referenced any irrelevant feed but that's > not a good thing to do. Conscious authors should only use rel="feed" as > defined in the spec. I agree, but the spec doesn't say what you want it to, and I'm not convinced that it should or that authors want it to. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 5 November 2007 09:33:26 UTC