On 4/30/06, James M Snell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/PaceMediaEntries3
The WG seems to be in agreement that the current definition of Media Collections is sub-optimal.
False. It's just that many of the WG members that are still with us are those that have proposed these very same things in the past, and had them rejected.
There is inconsistency in the behaviors of media and entry collections
I don't see how this proposal makes things more "consistent", and the term is so poorly defined that the claim becomes content-free grandstanding.
there is ambiguity in what the Location header needs to point at
Right. Separate pace, please.
there are problems when trying to match up what a client posted to what actually shows > up in the collections Atom feed, etc. This Pace attempts to fix all of those issues by redefining the problem.
This seems tied to the Location issue.
A number of incremental improvements. 1. Only specifies content/@src for the public reference URI. Still uses link/@rel=edit-resource to specify the edit URI.
Where did edit-resource come from? Which part of the rationale does it address?
2. Added "entry" value for app:accept, missing app:accept is equivalent to <app:accept>entry</app:accept>. <app:accept>image/*</app:accept> means ONLY image files can be posted. <app:accept>entry,image/*</app:accept> means that both entry documents and image files can be posted.
Which part of the rationale does this capability address? I don't see it. There's no pressure to respond, but if someone does, please don't waste everyone's time with a circular argument along the lines of "media collections are suboptimal". How does this relate to metaWeblog.newMediaPost? That's the code that this interface is going to be implemented with, at least in blogging platforms, initially. I don't think this proposal addresses our primary use case, blogging, at all. Adding a negotiation mechanism based MIME types and subtypes does not add simplicity or consistency, and I find the claim so absurd as to be insulting. As I see it, this pace adds an additional level of indirection and pretends to solve a problem. With this approach, I couldn't even tell you what the atom:summary is summarizing or the atom:title is titling. Is it summarizing the atom:content element? The "associated media resource"? The content of some other link element? -- Robert Sayre
