Re: Atom Content Negotiation

[Hadrien Gardeur <[e-mail]>]

>
> On reflection, I don't think the link template idea above is a good
> solution,
> because the client has no way of finding out what inline content types are
> available.
>
> I wonder if a better solution would be to invent three new pieces of
> machinery:
>
> * a new @inline-type extension attribute for use on atom:link elements
>
> * a new Accept-Inline HTTP header
>
> * a new <accept-inline> element for use within app:collection elements in
> Atom
> service documents
>

These are three different problems though...
Erik seems to be strictly interested in solving the first one, and in this
case, would a single attribute with a secondary mimetype be enough ?
I don't think that we need a new rel value, or that we should limit this new
attribute to a specific rel either. While you're strictly talking about
alternate versions of the same content, this attribute would also be useful
for other use cases (for example I might publish a music review as an atom
entry, and provide a link@rel="related" with type="application/zip" and
inline-type="audio/mpeg").

Hadrien