RE: Link rel attribute "stylesheet"

["James Yenne" <jamesy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Yes, I currently work around using the IRI, as mentioned, to specify the
relationship and that works fine.  Re namesapces, I just think namespaces
are plentiful already and add a little more work in terms of parsing.  I'm
applying them at the feed level, and as James Snell shows, they can be
useful in entries also.  

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-atom-syntax@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-atom-syntax@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of A. Pagaltzis
Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2006 8:43 PM
To: atom-syntax@xxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Link rel attribute "stylesheet"


* James Yenne <jamesy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [2006-02-27 05:25]:
>My feeds contain a generic xml-stylesheet, which formats the feed for 
>display along with a feed-specific css.  Since xsl processors do not 
>have a standard way to pass parameters to xsl stylesheets, I provide 
>this feed-specific css to the xsl processor in the feed as a link with 
>rel="stylesheet".

Smells like abuse to me. I’d pass it to the XSL transform using a namespaced
element instead, à la

    <feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom";>
        <css
xmlns="tag:example.org,2006:Foo">/somewhere/over/the/rainbow.css</css>
        <!-- ... -->
    </feed>

If you really don’t want to put in a namespaced element for some
(odd?) reason, you can use an IRI to specify the relationship:

    <atom:link rel="http://example.org/rel/stylesheet";
href="/somewhere/over/the/rainbow.css"/>

I don’t think a `stylesheet` relationship warrants adoption in the canon in
any case.

Regards,
--
Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>