On Jun 7, 2006, at 9:25 AM, Kyle Marvin wrote:
I like the basic approach of PaceCategoryLink. I prefer an out-of-line link relation model that might also be refererenced from multiple collection elements and even from feed documents. This being said, I think specifying a link relation but not the specifics of the document it references doesn't create any real interop benefit.
Agreed. And actually I don't see why PaceCategoryListing2 and PaceCategoryLink are two different proposals. If you have a <categories> element, why shouldn't you be able to have *either* <category> children *or* a pointer to another resource.
And since we're already thinking about an app:categories element, couldn't we just define an "Atom Categories Document" whose root is required to be <app:categories> and can have any number of <atom:category> elements as children? It would be like one paragraph in the spec and it would be a complete no-brainer to implement.
I'd really hate to miss the chance to get basic category listing in the APP.
Unless someone shouts STOP I'm going to do a Pace. -Tim
