Am 14.10.2005 um 20:00 schrieb James Holderness:
Mark Nottingham wrote:
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.
The idea is excellent. As for the naming sugar of the relation "head",
"anchor" or "origin" could work also.
//Stefan
