[whatwg] PaceEntryMediatype

Thu Dec 7 23:08:08 PST 2006

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