I agree. It would be useful to work on placing a little bit more
weight on the rel relation rather than putting everything on the mime
type. After all if every link is going to be an "alternate" relation,
then what was the point of the rel="..." attribute? We might as well
have stuck with simple <a href=""> anchors.
I think there is still time to put forward a number of simple
relations such as "feed", "entry" or even "service" or "collection".
This could be really useful distinctions.
Henry
On 21 Nov 2006, at 20:46, Eric Scheid wrote:
We're in a good position, in this WG, to suggest a future standard.
We've
delved deeply into the intricacies, we've examined a wide range of use
cases.
Speaking of which ... there's another use case to consider. Since
Atom has
promoted interest in using feed documents in an archival manner, it is
entirely reasonable to use @rel="alternate" to point to an archive
feed
document which contains the *same* content as the referring page,
as opposed
to referring to a feed document which has the "most recent"
additions from
the same source as where the contents of the current page came
from. (what a
mouthful!)
