IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Atom Link Extensions Use Case

James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Fri, 08 June 2012 20:20 UTC

Return-Path: <owner-atom-syntax@mail.imc.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-atompub-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-atompub-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0350221F85FB for <ietfarch-atompub-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Jun 2012 13:20:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.546
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.546 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.053, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kWHVHXbHySCR for <ietfarch-atompub-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Jun 2012 13:20:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hoffman.proper.com (IPv6.Hoffman.Proper.COM [IPv6:2605:8e00:100:41::81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 333E121F85CC for <atompub-archive@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Jun 2012 13:20:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hoffman.proper.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q58KDGnu039090 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 8 Jun 2012 13:13:16 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-atom-syntax@mail.imc.org)
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.5/8.13.5/Submit) id q58KDG7K039089; Fri, 8 Jun 2012 13:13:16 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-atom-syntax@mail.imc.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: hoffman.proper.com: majordom set sender to owner-atom-syntax@mail.imc.org using -f
Received: from mail-we0-f171.google.com (mail-we0-f171.google.com [74.125.82.171]) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q58KDEjB039084 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for <atom-syntax@imc.org>; Fri, 8 Jun 2012 13:13:16 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from jasnell@gmail.com)
Received: by wejx9 with SMTP id x9so1754046wej.16 for <atom-syntax@imc.org>; Fri, 08 Jun 2012 13:13:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=iszidJ9hNXZ1B8IDbiQ45yTNCNofmaSYkuN4ekLodJs=; b=HNwM9ELQKGtCYmoO6qwvxZY6h8HHkP8bYpM/UyEz27xOsEXhA/nuiSi1Ek7ymAL48R ILQfWwbSVbKwhIlsUZRnKNXyjTHJPDWrYyT35pWdgEVtU7IaUgak6hsglp3bUFxHs2L4 JCQoevhJge9i4lk40RqrWKeLmFSYB2HhMs4avoGL2UxdRIXflQeBuMfit+HU0oOrymNM rcOd1lpbGknovbYewPu1VypF1ZOC+O3ghXFICmyWLykzlhLMhgNkAVBmtinsXEIiBpmr vD79v8i84YCOfu+GllQ5Zt67yHsx/NcatAkOcqKuZ3tpryvq+zFPzs/vWtAFICVDStEu WjUw==
Received: by 10.180.24.39 with SMTP id r7mr3111016wif.9.1339186393872; Fri, 08 Jun 2012 13:13:13 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.223.104.12 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Jun 2012 13:12:53 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CA+ZpN27hphrjLLjmmP4hU457=DHLrns82armBHsEJJ5dcsbMSQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABzDd=4pwK3Ao=fGOL4K+vN3po9iwd2QBkmL8OwEw3ZmYvW=Xw@mail.gmail.com> <CA+ZpN27_XfQnedj1v0BgS7G1BLR2Yq5ETkwROLXnCZbSEJLZ5A@mail.gmail.com> <CABzDd=6551L3XoZUx29kyohHGo26LTrbMXSHp2WoUvuY3Nu7uA@mail.gmail.com> <CA+ZpN27hphrjLLjmmP4hU457=DHLrns82armBHsEJJ5dcsbMSQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2012 13:12:53 -0700
Message-ID: <CABP7Rbd7HZdwDtfPUJFARxKAJQit7DKWF89BxCpqOU7Xi62hOg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Atom Link Extensions Use Case
To: Tim Bray <twbray@google.com>
Cc: Ed Summers <ehs@pobox.com>, atom-syntax <atom-syntax@imc.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by hoffman.proper.com id q58KDGjA039085
Sender: owner-atom-syntax@mail.imc.org
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://www.imc.org/atom-syntax/mail-archive/>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:atom-syntax-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
List-ID: <atom-syntax.imc.org>

Tim, I'm curious... do have a particular objection to just using the
hash attribute in the draft?

- James

On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 10:17 AM, Tim Bray <twbray@google.com> wrote:
> D'oh, right. So why not
>
> <link loc:checksum="3c89ea593c01483fd091" ...other link apparatus... href=""
> />
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 10:15 AM, Ed Summers <ehs@pobox.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 10:41 AM, Tim Bray <twbray@google.com> wrote:
>> > Why not just drop an element into the <entry> in your own namespace?
>> >  This
>> > doesn’t feel like any kind of a link to me.
>> >
>> > <feed xmlns:loc="http://whatever.loc.gov">
>> >   ...
>> >   <entry>
>> >     ...
>> >     <loc:checksum>3c89ea593c01483fd091</loc:checksum
>>
>> Since there can (potentially) be multiple <link> elements per <entry>
>> it would be difficult to know which resource the checksum applied to
>> no?
>>
>> //Ed
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email