Mark Nottingham wrote:
I agree that it's important to honour the document order; that's what FH
tries to do. I'm a little surprised to hear you say that people thought
that this was previously 'next'; I'd never heard that (but will be happy
to put a note in).
Mark Pilgrim's article on XML.com discussing the Atom Link Model:
http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2004/06/16/dive.html
I can't say I've seen it widely used, but there is at least one occurrence
in the wild (Mark's archives).
Hmm. Yeah, I see what you're saying. Actually, I think this is an
opportunity -- we we define a new link relation to the subscription
document, and specify that it can only occur in archive documents, it
obviates the need for a separate fh:archive flag, which in turn means
that you don't have to declare two namespaces to use fh in RSS archive
documents -- which was one of the things making me reluctant to switch
over to atom:link.
How about:
<atom:link rel="subscription" href="..."/>
Yeah, I think that's a great idea. I'm not sure about the name though. Would
it not be better as a verb (say "subscribe") since the link is effectively
providing you with a url with which you can subscribe to the feed. This
seems to me more in line with the verb-based link relations being used in
the Atom publishing protocol.
Admittedly in this case the link could just as easily be interpreted as a
passive pointer to a document rather than an operation as such. I'm not
really arguing strongly either way. Just something to think about.
Regards
James
