Re: [LinkLog] flaw in the link rel="related" clarified

[Anne van Kesteren <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> > In that case they should drop |rel="alternate"|, but never use
> > |rel="alternate"| instead of |rel="about"|. It would only cause
> > confusion if you make it interchangeable and it isn't necessary at
> > all.
>
> Sorry, what I actually meant by 'interchangeable' is that an entry 
> element may contain 'alternate' and/or 'about' links, and not that
> they can be used to express the same meaning.

Ah, ok.


> The spec currently says:
>
>     atom:entry elements MUST contain at least one atom:link element with
>     a rel attribute value of "alternate".
>
> So my initial thought was to change it to:
>
>     atom:entry elements MUST contain at least one atom:link element with
>     a rel attribute value of [either] "alternate" [or "about"].
>
> But now I see that this clause should be removed altogether.

That or we require everyone to make a archive, which will benefit 
Google, |rel="via"| and other methods of indexing.

If we choose the latter, the current phrase is still correct, but we 
could add a line which states that |rel="alternate"| points to a 
permanent web location.


--
 Anne van Kesteren
 <http://annevankesteren.nl/>