+1 Things which are simply links should be encoded as links... It is frequently seductive to provide special syntax to handle common or well-known cases, but the end result is often just an unnecessary increase in complexity. It is best to consistently encode all objects of the same general type and reserve special cases for the truly special cases.
bob wyman On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 12:59 PM, James Snell <[email protected]> wrote: > Ok, this is something that has bugged me for quite a white... the atom:icon > and atom:logo elements are terribly underspecified as just a simple IRI. > Those these really should be link objects. What I'd like to propose is a > deprecation of those elements in favor of <link rel="icon" href="..." /> and > <link rel="image" href="..." />. The icon and image rel attributes would be > added to the registry of link relations... > > So instead of.. > > <feed> > <icon>http://.../image.jpg</icon> > ... > </feed> > > It would be... > > <feed> > <link rel="icon" href="http://.../image.jpg"; type="image/jpeg" /> > ... > </feed> > > The nice thing about this approach is that it does not actually require any > changes to the spec. The icon and image rel values would be added to the > registry and implementations would need to be modified to look for them as > an alternative to the icon and logo elements. > > Thoughts? >
![http://.../image.jpg"](http://.../image.jpg"){kind=link}