[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

meta-issue: arbitrary relationships required?

To: Atom Syntax <atom-syntax@xxxxxxx>
Subject: meta-issue: arbitrary relationships required?
From: Tim Bray <Tim.Bray@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 10:21:14 -0700
In-reply-to: <>
List-archive: <http://www.imc.org/atom-syntax/mail-archive/>
List-id: <atom-syntax.imc.org>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:atom-syntax-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
References: <> <> <>
Sender: owner-atom-syntax@xxxxxxxxxxxx

On Oct 9, 2004, at 9:30 AM, Danny Ayers wrote:

as long as there is still a uniform means of defining
arbitrary relationships between Atom resources and other resources.

Is this a requirement for Atom? I suggest that it's not. I'd be interested in hearing arguments from prior syndication art or from our charter. -Tim

Follow-Ups:
- Re: meta-issue: arbitrary relationships required?
  - From: Danny Ayers

References:
- Re: rel values
  - From: Dare Obasanjo
- Re: rel values
  - From: Robert Sayre
- Re: rel values
  - From: Danny Ayers

Prev by Date: Re: rel values
Next by Date: Re: rel values
Previous by thread: Re: rel values
Next by thread: Re: meta-issue: arbitrary relationships required?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread