Sylvain Hellegouarch wrote:
>[snip]
> If a feed containg FTE information is meant to be handled by machines
> only, then those values are not precise enough to be use (but I'd be happy
> to gearing about them though). If those values are to be presented to
> users, they are also not precise to have any interest.
>
I have no idea what you mean by "not precise enough to be used". What
makes them imprecise?
Look at just about piece of blogging software that accepts comments and
on the front page you'll typically see a link that specifies the number
of comment received for that entry. It may, or may not be an accurate
count, but it serves a useful purpose. Why is the same metadata not
useful in an entry/feed?
>[snip]
> Another point is that neither your draft nor RFC 4287 seem to say what a
> processor, which cannot process a value of the rel attribute, should do.
> Should the link be ignored? Should an error be raised? I assume the former
> but sadly the spec is not helping in this case.
>
The spec is silent on this, handle it however you want to handle it in
your implementation. IMHO, Good implementations will silently ignore
links they don't understand.
> Finally, if I set a <link rel="replies" ... /> into a feed element, should
> the ref attribute of the in-reply-to should use the id of the feed or the
> entry it concerns? If it is the former, aggregators won't be able to
> correlate threads and entries.
>
The ref attribute is the unique identifier of the resource being
responded to. It doesn't make make sense to respond to a Feed.
- James
