Comments on: “rel” name requirement overloaded http://bill.burkecentral.com/2009/11/19/rel-name-requirement-overloaded/ Software plumbing using middleware wrenches Thu, 09 Feb 2012 19:51:59 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: billburke http://bill.burkecentral.com/2009/11/19/rel-name-requirement-overloaded/#comment-3195 Fri, 20 Nov 2009 14:13:54 +0000 http://bill.burkecentral.com/?p=327#comment-3195 Its not what it looks like that bothers me. Again, for an application, the URI could easily become invalid. Also, what happens when and if you do register with IANA? Finally, “rel” is very different than XML Namespaces. With “rel” the “namespace” and schema location are the same thing. There’s a clear separation within XML that’s missing in and Link.

]]> By: Mike Amundsen http://bill.burkecentral.com/2009/11/19/rel-name-requirement-overloaded/#comment-3194 Fri, 20 Nov 2009 00:47:55 +0000 http://bill.burkecentral.com/?p=327#comment-3194 Yeah, the use of full URIs is kinda messy to look at, but that’s the only downside I can see. Since it’s _machines_ that will be interpreting these values, not humans, it hardly matters what it looks like, right?

This is no different than Doc-Type, XML Schema Namespaces and other similar identifiers.

]]>