On 21/1/05 1:07 PM, "Asbj�rn Ulsberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> a) Change rel="alternate" to rel="feed", rel="subscription" or similar. > > What I have a problem with is �what is the feed for if it isn't an > alternative to the resource you're looking at?�. How is a resource which shows the last 15 entries as of today an "alternative" representation of an entry which was published six months ago and has long slipped out of the sliding window? > 'rel' should say what > relation the current resource has to the referenced one. �Feed� isn't a > relation, �alternate� is. my interpretation of "feed" as a relationship is "here is the feed in which this entry was originally published". I prefer "feed", it's shorter. > Not sure if the semantics are very important here, but I'm having trouble > with putting a non-relative word like �feed� into an attribute which is > supposed to describe relationship. Its not the best word, but others which are better are already taken for other purposes (eg "source", "origin", etc), or are clumsy word-pairs which are still not properly indicative of the ongoing publishing nature (eg. DC's "part-of"). e.
