ian at hixie.ch
Mon Nov 5 09:21:13 PST 2007
On Thu, 7 Dec 2006, Alexey Feldgendler 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.
Well, it's related in the sense that people looking at the current page
might find it useful. I don't see that that is a problem.
> I would mark it up like this:
> <h1>Feeds for this site</h1>
> <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>
> Note the absence of rel attribute on the <a>: there is no specific
> typical relation between the current document and the referenced
That's certainly an option (though I would recommend adding rel=feed), but
I don't see that that makes <link> any less useful here.
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the whatwg