[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [xri] Version Control Commit by blade
not sure which commit these were actually on, but i have two comments. You modified Section 2.4.1 to read: > The one distinction is that link relationships described by the > <Link> element are between the resource described by the XRD (the > context resource) and the linked resources (the target resources), > and not between the XRD document itself and the linked resource. The addition here are the two parenthetical statements, "context resource" and "target resource". Both of these are new terms that are not present anywhere else in the spec. Some time ago we did away with the term "target resource" in favor of "linked resource". We also consistently use the phrase "resource described by the XRD" throughout the spec. It is a mouthful, and I'm not terribly fond of it, but it is accurate and the best we could come up with. I don't disagree that this sentence can be a little confusing with all the "resources" being thrown about, but I'm concerned about throwing in new terminology here that isn't at all consistent with the rest of the spec. You added the following paragraph to the end of Section 2.5.1: > New relation types between resources must follow the extensibility > and registration requirements defined in [HTTP Link Header]. While I don't disagree with this, I'm curious if it's necessary. The whole reason link-header had to create a registry is because it is using tokens for registered values, and only using URIs for extended values. XRD is specifically using URIs only, so we don't really care about the token values. The universal rule of URIs is that you don't make up new URIs in namespaces you don't own. That would imply that you can't make up a new relationship in the "http://www.iana.org/assignment/relation " unless you've properly registered it. Now, I do like having some kind of reference because it instructs publishers how to format those token values as URIs, but the wording of the above paragraph seems out of place, given how XRD uses these values.