RE: Reviving the features draft?

["Brian Smith" <brian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Jan Algermissen wrote:
> Keep in mind though, that I am viewing this in the sense of  
> 'collection X implements behaviour Y, and much less in the sense
> of 'collection X has capability Y'. My use cases are more like
> 'client wants to place an order and thus must look for a
> collection that is an order acceptor. As I said in the original
> post: late binding of client and server based on type.

> Brian Smith wrote:
> > Unsurprisingly then, it hasn't been widely adopted even though
> > it has been around forever.
> 
> Hmm, I think it is more that only very few people practically apply  
> APP to non-publishing contexts yet and just do not need the
> collection type refinement.

<link rel='http://example.org/orderProcessor'
      href='http://example.org/collection'/>

This way you can link directly to the collection instead of linking to a
service document that links to the collection. It works inside of
service documents too:

  <app:collection href='http://example.org/collection'>
      <link rel='http://example.org/orderProcessor'
            href='http://example.org/collection'/> 
  </app:collection>

- Brian