[whatwg] Inferring rel="feed" from the media type
ian at hixie.ch
Thu Nov 30 14:31:59 PST 2006
On Thu, 30 Nov 2006, Mark Baker wrote:
> > How about introducing a new rel keyword: nonfeed?
> I just suggested that on the Atom lists.
> > Then one could say rel="alternate nonfeed" and it would be clear that
> > referenced URL contains an alternative representation that is not a
> > feed.
> Well, that wouldn't work because agents would still pick out "alternate"
> and the media type and infer "subscribability" from that. "alternate"
> would have to be left off. Hence my (somewhat) serious suggestion of
> But yah, I think that's a decent way forward. I'm still not convinced
> that the harmful practice of inferring rel="feed" is beyond the point of
> no return, but nobody's chiming in to agree with me, and I don't have
> the time to do the necessary implementer-herding myself, so oh well.
I agree with Simon on this:
On Thu, 30 Nov 2006, Simon Pieters wrote:
> I don't see why this:
> <link rel=alternate href=foo.atom>
> ...isn't good enough. It is a hyperlink to an alternate representation
> of the current document in application/atom+xml format that is not a
> syndication feed. IMHO introducing new rel keywords is an uglier hack
> than just omitting the type="" attribute.
It's not clear to me that there is an actual real-life problem here. It
seems there is a perceived theoretical problem, but we also have a
theoretical solution which works in practice. Unless the problem becomes
actually widespread, this seems like it would be solution enough.
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the whatwg