IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [link-relations] NEW RELATION: collection

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Sat, 06 August 2011 09:41 UTC

Return-Path: <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
X-Original-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B53D21F8888 for <link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 6 Aug 2011 02:41:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -103.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.400, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0yrP4WFsacS6 for <link-relations@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 6 Aug 2011 02:41:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 2C30821F886C for <link-relations@ietf.org>; Sat, 6 Aug 2011 02:41:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 06 Aug 2011 09:41:42 -0000
Received: from p508FCEA5.dip.t-dialin.net (EHLO [192.168.178.36]) [80.143.206.165] by mail.gmx.net (mp006) with SMTP; 06 Aug 2011 11:41:42 +0200
X-Authenticated: #1915285
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18790okrQg70/fqxaGJ0F2fNMW0KrW1weq6pC35qb EwG46wZ2Cv+FkS
Message-ID: <4E3D0C54.7070209@gmx.de>
Date: Sat, 06 Aug 2011 11:41:40 +0200
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110624 Thunderbird/5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: mike amundsen <mamund@yahoo.com>
References: <CAPW_8m676cCQEHN=_XE_E4k_7zF=MBNE7O6Cvy1+BLwp9fG8MA@mail.gmail.com> <4E3CF493.9010007@gmx.de> <CAPW_8m44aMqgFJ7nf3trD=r_LTNPYnQjGp31YMfrGGeX1bqC=A@mail.gmail.com> <4E3CFA65.3090300@gmx.de> <CAPW_8m5AyZsxSg2FBsNCQ7WyyS0ghZpQZ0jeAc=yQ92=qmH-jw@mail.gmail.com> <4E3CFE8A.1070103@gmail.com> <CAPW_8m4M0S0BS37OPCkCD1BPUwL7gMYM7jP5qxr3B=vnxW7HVg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPW_8m4M0S0BS37OPCkCD1BPUwL7gMYM7jP5qxr3B=vnxW7HVg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
Cc: link-relations@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [link-relations] NEW RELATION: collection
X-BeenThere: link-relations@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: <link-relations.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/link-relations>, <mailto:link-relations-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/link-relations>
List-Post: <mailto:link-relations@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:link-relations-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/link-relations>, <mailto:link-relations-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 06 Aug 2011 09:41:26 -0000

On 2011-08-06 11:03, mike amundsen wrote:
> Mykyta:
>
> Understood. I will work up the I-D document(s) this weekend and update
> my application.

+10

> Should I write an I-D for each link rel type? or is it appropriate to
> include both link rels in a single I-D?

I think they should go into a single spec.

(let me know if you need xml2rfc assistance)

Best regards, Julian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email